I think we all tend to like what we are used to and find something different "wrong".
It is not the effect I am hearing or scoring on. But obviously that radiation pattern makes a difference with respect to what I hear in the room.
I'm all in for that.@amirm , do you plan to measure the second unit for comparison?
None of that is possible right now. I need to setup a different space with such controls. My main system is just not setup for this kind of experimentation.
I would love to see a review on the powered wireless LS50s. Been using the regular passive ones with much joy.
Thanks!
Wow, impressive! This one I was waiting for so long! You guys rock!
I BLINDLY bought a pair of R3 and center R2C without even demo and this review makes me happy. Before this, I did the same with the big center from the previous generation R600.
I wonder how difficult it would be for someone with technical/tinkerer know-how to take an off the shelf remote controlled (or IP controlled?) speaker selector (or perhaps multi-zone AVR?) and make an app for say a Samsung phone (with an IR beamer) that could randomly choose (and obscure from you) the playing speaker but allow you to subjectively score them and then give you the result at the end.
Clearly, our host likes the M16 better than the R3 even though the R3 scores higher. OK, the M16 measures strong, third best so far, but still there is a gap.*for most people
**according to Sean Olive
***as implemented by MZKM
****depending on your room shape, size, treatment, listening window, and preferences
Clearly, our host likes the M16 better than the R3 even though the R3 scores higher. OK, the M16 measures strong, third best so far, but still there is a gap.
@amirm, the distortion test states that 86 + 11 = 105 (sensitivity + 10/2.8Vrms). What did I miss?
KEF R3 is -3 dB @ 65 Hz and has a bump in the treble on a mostly flat FR graph.Clearly, our host likes the M16 better than the R3 even though the R3 scores higher. OK, the M16 measures strong, third best so far, but still there is a gap.
I have no excuses for the following comment ....but..
That's because the R3 sounds S**t.
I'm guessing, but I have a feeling the coax can play every note perfectly. so measures well on a sweep. It just cannot play all the notes at the same time .(multi tone test)
The ATC SCM11 measures pretty well, so no clue what you are talking about:I find it interesting that Amirm is finding that this speaker sounds 'uninvolving'. After a very respected audio engineer told me he discovered that the coax driver series that KEF use here measures phenomenally well a couple of years ago when the KEF Blade was released, I went to hear a set local to me in a well acoustically treated room.
Awful.
I wish I knew why. I knew they measured very well.
Tried an A/B test against an ATC SCM11. Ha! No comparison. Subjective comments are just that, but........
The KEF sounded dead, boring and lacked any kind of drive some how. Even with the bass EQ'd up, it just didn't sing. Detail seams to be there, but not in the upper mid.
Amirm: I have a sneaky suspicion that if you ran a multi tone test- they will show up that coax is no good. Remember, you subjectively liked the JBL 305......and that has less bass. I know you know there is more to this speaker game
KEF R3 is -3 dB @ 65 Hz and has a bump in the treble on a mostly flat FR graph.
Revel M16 is -3 dB @ 60 Hz and has a bump in the bass and slightly rolled-off treble on a mostly flat FR graph.
Maybe just a preference for warmth / bass emphasis which Amir mentions as a possibility in his impressions.