KEF R11 vs. Q900 Blind test can’t tell difference! HELP

[mj30250]

This hobby tends to get dramatically less expensive when high SPLs and "luxury" aesthetics aren't a requirement, ditto for deep bass extension sans subs. I tend to agree that this explains the bulk of what the OP experienced.

 

[DanielT]

This hobby tends to get dramatically less expensive when high SPLs and "luxury" aesthetics aren't a requirement, ditto for deep bass extension sans subs. I tend to agree that this explains the bulk of what the OP experienced.

Then throw into the equation apartment buildings with thin walls and noise-sensitive neighbors. Better then to invest in sensible headphones. Possibly some small speakers that can't produce that much bass together with subwoofers that are plugged in every now and then. A sub that is used sparingly so it doesn't disturb the neighbors.Desktop speakers
and thus close listening is also a solution.

Having said that. It is not the lowest bass frequency around 20 Hz that annoys sound-sensitive neighbors, but bass higher in frequency. Might be worth thinking about in relation to the scenario described above.

 

[exm]

If you want to hear my opinion, get a used R900s. I have owned the R11 and R900s and I found the R900 to be superior, especially in LF. Yes, 2x8" LF drivers really do make a difference.

 

[ROOSKIE]

KEF R11 are on closeout so I decided to pickup a pair to replace my Q900. After days of listening the R11 seemed to sound similar to the Q900. I was expecting a bigger difference moving up a series.

I had thought about returning the R11 and wanted to compare them next to each. I setup an a/b speaker switcher. First I had my wife listening to 10 different tracks and I switched from R11 to Q900 (No EQ/Full Range) and wrote down which speaker she thought sounded better for each track. The results were 5x R11 5x Q900. Did with EQ 5x 2x Q900 2x R11 and 1x “I don’t know are you done”. She said she could not really hear much if any difference. Maybe one seemed clearer but other nicer. I did the same test while she kept track and I scored the same with no EQ and set to full range 5x R11 5x KEF.

Testing blindly I was certain I would be able to identify the R11. Both speakers sounded nearly the same to me and I did not have a SQ preference. Both clear, same soundstage and depth. When I use EQ subjectively I do not notice a difference I can consistently identify. As I write this I am listening to my stereo but have no idea if the Q900 are playing or the R11.

My hearing was tested six months ago and it is in the average range with some hearing loss in my right ear at spoken frequencies. My wife’s hearing seems to be better than mine.

Anyone have any idea how this is possible? Is there something I need to do to get the R11 to steal the show. I have included pictures of the setup and frequency response of the speakers from soundstage and stereophile.

OP, 1st the experience of diminished returns is really real and nothing will ever be as profound as the 1st really good upgrade we have done -----> such as going from xxx thrift find to a $2k set from a respected firm.

2nd with all due respect you may not quite know what to look for or have enough experience. To some degree after you have really good sound 95% of people are so happy that anything more is just not notable and maybe not even noticeable. Now that said it is also a reality that it can be considered a skill to really hear differences and that doesn't mean they are actually minute or that you ought to strain to hear them. It means it may take some time to know what you are missing(if anything)

What I would do is listen for a week or two to the R11's a lot. Then go back to the Q900's and note any subjective experiences.

Then I would redo the blind testing, making absolutely sure to level match them as best as you can. They should be matched from about 300hrz to 3000hrz. Though you can see how any possible method for matching speakers SPL can be off. Truly matching is very hard to do actually and as we know if two speakers basically sound good the louder one will often win simply due to that. Maybe a speaker with boosted bass will prevail in a short test or one with boosted trebble, short term blind testing can be problematic which is why it is hardly ever done. It is expensive to do(for a company) and takes much time and effort. They really need feedback from trained listeners which most of us are not and the inconsistency is a real issue.

In any case give it another go and if you have patience try more than 10 tracks, something like 30 would be better. Note which ones you listen to first and make sure it is not a 2nd time winner everytime type of thing.

It may turn out that they are tied or even the R11 is not your preference.

Whatever you do, don't strain yourself to hear, that is pointless IMHO. If the differences are not coming in a reasonably accessible way then be done with it.

For example I have a KEF LS50meta and Q150 (and also a Q100 that I have not heard in a long time) both sound great. I think 95% of folks should just grab the Q150 due to the regular $300 sale price. The differences are there but they are not 'profound' and PEQ should match them quite well. That said, I do hear the LS50meta as a speaker with a more 'fluid sound' ; it is more natural(yes poetry) and clean and effortless 'feeling' and with less pinpoint imaging. The Q150 sounds a bit etched to me and it is a bit bright and the stage is notably more constrained . I would pay for the LS50meta due to my preference but another person could go the other way without me being surprised. I'd take my JBL 530 over them both any day so there is another $300 contender for 5.25" 2ways.

Both the Q150, and the JBL 530 are so good for $300 coupled with a sub or two, and even better if you can handle the speaker correction PEQ side of things. I can get both systems to sound like a well spent $3k.

If you return the R11's and go for another speaker, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on a Revel set. I have had my expereinces and you might be a good candidate for them. You may also want to try something unusual like the JBL L100, it might blow you away.
(No I do not work for Harman.)

 

[posvibes]

Me, personally would buy the R11's and the continual worrying of endless sleepless nights of doubt in having made the right decision that inevitably would follow, I would put to good use looking for damning reviews of the Q900's.

 

[Gerbrand]

I had a very similar experience. I had an old pair of Q700s and replaced them by a pair of R7s. To be honest the difference with your eyes closed is very small (maybe a little better imaging and some more extension in the bass, but that could just be my imagination). I just like the looks of the R7 a lot better...

 

[seanhyatt]

The Q900 has significant cabinet resonances in the midbass. They may or may not be audible, but I would expect the R11 bass to be cleaner.

The Q900 also has resonances from the midrange cone that show up in the mid to high treble. They might impart some harshness to some material.

These are noticeable in the Q900 at higher volumes. The uniQ midrange driver flops around and you can hear the mechanics of the driver chuffing as well as major distortion. The R11 at the same volume is solid. One big advantage for the R11. I usually only reach that level of failure with techno or dance music With the Q900.

I am on the edge of the line of diminishing returns.

 

[seanhyatt]

From what I can tell, the FR of both of these speakers is pretty similar. So I think you're mostly going to hear a difference if you are in a position to really notice resonances under 100hz, (i.e. your room response is really nice, which apparently it is not) or like others have said, if you're really pushing the SPL. Your room might be too small to require that kind of volume day-to-day, so the R11 might not be a useful upgrade for you. I'd say return the R11s and buy like, 4 subs and something to run DSP with...

possibly. I already have four subs in the corner. EQ of both Speakers are flat with the largest dip being 5db in bass. Above 500hz 3-4db variances at most with eq and reasonably similar without eq. The room is Acoustically treated with 4inch owens corning low end absorbers as well 2 inch owenscorning panels. There is some diffusion but need more.

 

[seanhyatt]

Looking at the pictures from your setup, the q900 may or may not have an advantage in sound because they are place with less distance between them . Every speaker pair always sounds the best at a certain place in a specific room, thats why its hard to do valuable A/B tests. You could always swap the speakers so the r11:s are in the middle and check If the sound gets better.

Yes, I am in the process of doing that and placement is a disadvantage of the test. I have moved both around. So far no major differences. Last night I did come to the conclusion that the imaging of the R11 is better especially with height when testing electronic music with constant extreme imaging.

Next I will test each speaker in mono and see if I notice anything.

 

[seanhyatt]

I had a very similar experience. I had an old pair of Q700s and replaced them by a pair of R7s. To be honest the difference with your eyes closed is very small (maybe a little better imaging and some more extension in the bass, but that could just be my imagination). I just like the looks of the R7 a lot better...

I am at the

Return the R11? You will do no such thing. Few things you need to do:
1. Never do blind tests anymore.
2. Find the justification for yourself and your wife to keep the cooler, more expensive one.
3. Sell all of them and get the Meta ones?
4. Maybe not take me seriously...

All those options except the 4th one have gone through my mind.

 

[seanhyatt]

Now, seriously, it is great you did the blind test, however hard to do. You have to consider the validity of that test, also, because it is not a double blind test, as I understand, because you and your wife were the test subjects and administrators at the same time.

Everybody here is taking your test at face value, just because you got the result that speakers sound the same, which might be the expected result here, and it might be a different story if you found that you liked the more expensive ones.

One other thing you need to consider is which pair makes you more happy and what the price difference mean to you both. We, humans, are visual animals and rely on other senses to form our perception of the world around us.

On the other hand, even if you found that R11 do sound better, you would have to decide if that SQ difference is worth the price difference...

exactly right

 

[seanhyatt]

What was it about the Q900 that you didn’t like? If there wasn’t anything obvious and specific, you might find that no amount of upgrading (within reason) is going to significantly improve your listening experience (aesthetics are another thing). Past a certain level of competence, diminishing returns set in big time and everything in the chain (including speakers) start sounding similar (assuming you’re not looking for some particular coloration). I speak about this from my personal struggles with upgradeitis...

After I purchased a pair of Magnepan LRS I wanted the similar clarity with KEFs and did not want two pairs of speakers in the room. The R11 do not solve that problem. Also I have an ATMOS setup with all 7.4.4 with KEF speakers except for the SUB. I did not want to go to another brand for the fronts so they would match.

The only major issue I can find with the Q900 is that the uni-q midrange driver distorts and losses control at higher levels. I only reach those levels with techno or dance music with a lot of mid bass.

I can not justify spending more than $3000 on a speaker.

I am on the line of diminishing returns.

 

[ROOSKIE]

exactly right

I already mentioned it in post #46 but really try just using the R11's for an extended time and then go back. This is not any sort of AB or ABX. It is a long term digestion sort of thing. Very subjective but with this I have definetly discovered some things that helped me chose.
In the short term we can humans have the ability adapt very quickly and some of us do it very very quickly so quick or short A&B compro's might not be the best reflection of what a long term experience will be like.
Could be like a car that looks great, drives fast and but you come to realize it has a strange engine sound you find annoying, poor ergonomics and a seat designed for a stooped over older guy and not someone who sits upright and is fit.
My best speakers have been the ones I simply can not stop listening to and always want to keep going. I have had other speakers that sounded good and measure great that just don't have this quality. I can not pinpoint the reasons however they come with extended time and they are not subtle at all and it is consistent.
I have also had speakers sound great in short sessions that I do not enjoy for long sessions and some that don't grab my attention fully when I am 'hyped' to compare but really come alive when I am just listeing for enjoyment and I realize just how good they are.... as I am sure many folks have expereinced.

 

[MarcT]

My experience was similar when I compared Sonus Faber Lumina V vs Sonetto VIII, albeit at a dealer shop. We compared them in the same room and with the same exact system; all we did was swap out the speakers. So, there was some delay between hearing the second set of speakers and this was not done blind.

That said, I really couldn't tell that the Sonetto VIII were much superior to the Lumina V, although their list price is almost double. And we did play them up to a pretty good sound level. Perhaps this should not be too surprising, since I think SF uses the same drivers in both lines of speakers.

Now, the Sonetto use SF's "lute" shape cabinet, while the Lumina V is a typical rectangular box. I did audition a set of Sonetto V at another dealer one time, and when the volume was cranked up, the side panels were vibrating like crazy. The Lumina V has an internal box enclosure for the tweeter and mid driver, so perhaps the Lumina V cabinet is more inert than the Sonetto.

 

[exm]

A follow-up to my R900 post above after thinking about it some more. There really should be a difference. Not a big one, but a noticeable one. Few questions (sorry if I missed it):

1. What are your crossovers set to?
2. Do you use any type of RoomEQ?

Having said all of that, if you can afford it, keep the R11s. If you want to find a middle ground, get a pair of R900s. They are fantastic speakers and can be found for under $2,000 used.

 

[seanhyatt]

I already mentioned it in post #46 but really try just using the R11's for an extended time and then go back. This is not any sort of AB or ABX. It is a long term digestion sort of thing. Very subjective but with this I have definetly discovered some things that helped me chose.
In the short term we can humans have the ability adapt very quickly and some of us do it very very quickly so quick or short A&B compro's might not be the best reflection of what a long term experience will be like.
Could be like a car that looks great, drives fast and but you come to realize it has a strange engine sound you find annoying, poor ergonomics and a seat designed for a stooped over older guy and not someone who sits upright and is fit.
My best speakers have been the ones I simply can not stop listening to and always want to keep going. I have had other speakers that sounded good and measure great that just don't have this quality. I can not pinpoint the reasons however they come with extended time and they are not subtle at all and it is consistent.
I have also had speakers sound great in short sessions that I do not enjoy for long sessions and some that don't grab my attention fully when I am 'hyped' to compare but really come alive when I am just listeing for enjoyment and I realize just how good they are.... as I am sure many folks have expereinced.

I get what your are saying. I choose KEF because the speakers Are par of an all KEF speaker system. Neither the R11 or the Q900 have the ability to move me to “can not stop listening to”. Magnepan LRS do but don’t work well for home theater. I had both the LRS and Q900 previously in the room but cancelled my LRS+ order to buy the R11 hoping it would be a compromise and multiples better than the Q900.

 

[seanhyatt]

A follow-up to my R900 post above after thinking about it some more. There really should be a difference. Not a big one, but a noticeable one. Few questions (sorry if I missed it):

1. What are your crossovers set to?
2. Do you use any type of RoomEQ?

Having said all of that, if you can afford it, keep the R11s. If you want to find a middle ground, get a pair of R900s. They are fantastic speakers and can be found for under $2,000 used.

1. Usually 80hz sometime 60hz. I did the test full range For both with and without eq. The Q900 sometimes suffers at 60hz with distortion at loud levels. I have 4x monolith 10inch thx subs in the room.

2. Audyssey x32 or REW using the Denon X3600 internal eq. For the test I used Audyssey EQ.

 

[exm]

1. Usually 80hz sometime 60hz. I did the test full range For both with and without eq. The Q900 sometimes suffers at 60hz with distortion at loud levels. I have 4x monolith 10inch thx subs in the room.

2. Audyssey x32 or REW using the Denon X3600 internal eq. For the test I used Audyssey EQ.

So if you did a blind test, did you disable EQ or used the Q900 setting for both?

About the subs: 10” is relatively small. I rather have R900s in front with 2x8” drivers (I will stop about this now) over a 10” sub. Consider getting something bigger also for your sub when you can afford it. I do like the concept of 4 subs.

 

[ROOSKIE]

I get what your are saying. I choose KEF because the speakers Are par of an all KEF speaker system. Neither the R11 or the Q900 have the ability to move me to “can not stop listening to”. Magnepan LRS do but don’t work well for home theater. I had both the LRS and Q900 previously in the room but cancelled my LRS+ order to buy the R11 hoping it would be a compromise and multiples better than the Q900.

Yah, I see.

I have never heard the R11, I have owned the R3 twice. It is somewhat fair to say the R11 is an R3 with more bass drivers. I'd give the R3 5/5 in a review as I can see its appeal, love the form and engineering but would never ultimately choose it. I have several less expensive speakers I have personally prefered or at least found on par @ least in sighted testing.

Oh well if you need to stick with KEF I get it. Give that R11 a bit more of chance since it is there already, but if need be don't hesitate to return it when the choice is made.

 

[seanhyatt]

So if you did a blind test, did you disable EQ or used the Q900 setting for both?

About the subs: 10” is relatively small. I rather have R900s in front with 2x8” drivers (I will stop about this now) over a 10” sub. Consider getting something bigger also for your sub when you can afford it. I do like the concept of 4 subs.

For the blind test I ran the :

1. R11 and Q900 speaker full range via pure direct with no EQ
2. R11 with its own Audyssey EQ file full range as well as the Q900 with its own Audyssey EQ file full range

I regretted I did not get the 12".

By the way I am extremely cheap and try to be as thrifty as possible. I basically do not buy anything unless it is on sale or proves to be an extreme value.