-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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 R3 Speaker Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Steve Dallas
Major Contributor
At what distance from the listening position? To what SPL?
at 3-4 meters from the speakers, in a 5x5m room, medium volume
I'm worried about the low impedance value at low frequencies
mightycicadalord
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2021
- Messages
- 542
- Likes
- 555
yes
In the beautifull walnut color without the grilles ofcourse
BrokenEnglishGuy
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
- Messages
- 1,936
- Likes
- 1,158
the grilles didn't come?
Yes certainly, but the speakers are so beautifull to see IMHO
Should be no problem. I use PA5 to drive R3's in a slightly smaller room (20 sqm) and it works great.
Hi
Not to the point of pulling the trigger...
The R3, by all measurements and reviews, seem to be a superb speaker, and is often seen discounted around $1300 for the pair. I am an audiophile. There!
I said it... I feel a certain itch to move up from the wonderful, cannot stop repeating it , JBL LSR 308. Just asking for opinions here.. Subjectives are OK. I am not keen on lateral moves, i-e , a bit better but coming with its own set of caveats, compromises, etc... In that view, would the R3 be a worthwhile upgrade? Small 5 x 3.2 x 2.8 meters room, treated and listening distance is less than 3 meters. 3 Subwoofers in a quasi-Geddes configuration. Music and movies system. Plan would be to use the R3 as L,R and C.
Peace
Not to the point of pulling the trigger...
The R3, by all measurements and reviews, seem to be a superb speaker, and is often seen discounted around $1300 for the pair. I am an audiophile. There!
I said it... I feel a certain itch to move up from the wonderful, cannot stop repeating it , JBL LSR 308. Just asking for opinions here.. Subjectives are OK. I am not keen on lateral moves, i-e , a bit better but coming with its own set of caveats, compromises, etc... In that view, would the R3 be a worthwhile upgrade? Small 5 x 3.2 x 2.8 meters room, treated and listening distance is less than 3 meters. 3 Subwoofers in a quasi-Geddes configuration. Music and movies system. Plan would be to use the R3 as L,R and C.Peace
lherrm
Active Member
OT
I am getting cheap.. really cheap .. the R# is $1300/pair .. that alternative, which I am seriously contemplating is more than 3 times for a pair ...
Hi
Not to the point of pulling the trigger...
The R3, by all measurements and reviews, seem to be a superb speaker, and is often seen discounted around $1300 for the pair. I am an audiophile. There!
Peace
I have 708p, LSR305 and R3/R5/R11; if there's some specific Q on your mind maybe I can weigh in. I'm not sure anyone can really answer this for you because there's so many variables, not least of which is your tastes. Everything from # of cables running across your room, controlled vs. wide directiviyt, appearance, etc. I've developed an irrational addiction to picture perfect vertical directivity to the point where I'm probably going to sell my 226Be's and replace with R-series. Point being, what would seem like an upgrade to most (r-series to Be-series) is more of a side-grade to my ears in my room with my music. you may be the opposite, what qualifies a "worthwhile upgrade" to you?
Bought the R3 and R2c as LCR to take the place of Aurum Cantus V3m and V4c in my 5.1.4 system, which I have for the last 15 years. The price of the Rx is in the same range as the AC, so it's a side grade. Size wise, they are also similar, but the AC is built better with about 20% more weight and beautiful curve rosewood glossy cabinet.
Sound wise, the differences are obvious. Subjectively, the Rx are more natural (particularly in female vocal), precise, controlled, focus, while the AC are more open and airy. The harshness in recordings are much more audible in the AC than the Rx. For example, high notes from sopranos in an opera can be hard to listen to on the AC, but tolerable on the Rx (or my EQ Ananda headphone). Relatively speaking, the Rx has less sparkles and airiness from piano, cymbal, saxophone, flute etc. probably due to the ribbon tweeter of the AC, so I might prefer the AC for certain types of music. Since I have bass crossover at 100Hz, the bass from both set of speakers are similar, but I would give a slight edge to the Rx on mid-bass punch, likely due to the 3-way design so the bottom woofers only have to deal with mid-bass.
Objectively, I have not done much measurements with REW yet, but the measurements from Audyssey pre-EQ show much flatter responses from the Rx, which is to be expected.
For me, the Rx are keepers, as listening to sound closer to what is in the recordings is the approach I prefer to take in this hobby. I plan to listen to all my favorite music again and explore other music with the Rx from now on without worrying too much about the accuracy of the reproduction chain. I might keep the ACs and swap them in occasionally just to hear different sounds and fight hedonic adaption
Sound wise, the differences are obvious. Subjectively, the Rx are more natural (particularly in female vocal), precise, controlled, focus, while the AC are more open and airy. The harshness in recordings are much more audible in the AC than the Rx. For example, high notes from sopranos in an opera can be hard to listen to on the AC, but tolerable on the Rx (or my EQ Ananda headphone). Relatively speaking, the Rx has less sparkles and airiness from piano, cymbal, saxophone, flute etc. probably due to the ribbon tweeter of the AC, so I might prefer the AC for certain types of music. Since I have bass crossover at 100Hz, the bass from both set of speakers are similar, but I would give a slight edge to the Rx on mid-bass punch, likely due to the 3-way design so the bottom woofers only have to deal with mid-bass.
Objectively, I have not done much measurements with REW yet, but the measurements from Audyssey pre-EQ show much flatter responses from the Rx, which is to be expected.
For me, the Rx are keepers, as listening to sound closer to what is in the recordings is the approach I prefer to take in this hobby. I plan to listen to all my favorite music again and explore other music with the Rx from now on without worrying too much about the accuracy of the reproduction chain. I might keep the ACs and swap them in occasionally just to hear different sounds and fight hedonic adaption
Steve Dallas
Major Contributor
This will prove to be a fun shoot-out. But you will all have to wait for me to finish crashing into a tree, which probably means the weekend of the 19th and 20th. I also want to take this opportunity to revise the way I have done the bass traps in this room, even though trapping for SBIR is much uglier than it is effective.
As I said two pages ago, these are the only speakers I have ever regretted selling, and I was immediately reminded why. Expect tons of in-room measurements in the coming weeks...
As I said two pages ago, these are the only speakers I have ever regretted selling, and I was immediately reminded why. Expect tons of in-room measurements in the coming weeks...
Last edited:
how's the bass from R11?
Upgraded to EigenTakt Eval 1 from Ayima07. Sound became 3d in instruments. Now it feels. Many tracks were Ok on Ayima but there is huge difference. I am choosing between preamp but all is good. I need also to check highs (eq on 13500Hz+2db) because in my room I used it. But now EQ go different from overall sound. I can listen LZ on KEF R3 with EigenTakt.
The single scariest thing to me about ordering a pair of R3's, twice the price I'd ever spent on speakers before, was that they wouldn't be that much better. For this kind of money (and the R3's rep) the qualitative difference had to be more than "incremental." For that reason it was with great trepidation that I fired them up for the first time about an hour ago.
I needn't have worried. From the first note it was painfully obvious that, although I've owned and listened to pretty "good" speakers over the last couple of decades, I'd never heard "great" before. They're in a league I truly didn't know existed, and can do things I'm incapable of describing. It's humbling.
Obviously I'm a pretty happy camper.
I needn't have worried. From the first note it was painfully obvious that, although I've owned and listened to pretty "good" speakers over the last couple of decades, I'd never heard "great" before. They're in a league I truly didn't know existed, and can do things I'm incapable of describing. It's humbling.
Obviously I'm a pretty happy camper.
What did you have before?The single scariest thing to me about ordering a pair of R3's, twice the price I'd ever spent on speakers before, was that they wouldn't be that much better. For this kind of money (and the R3's rep) the qualitative difference had to be more than "incremental." For that reason it was with great trepidation that I fired them up for the first time about an hour ago.
I needn't have worried. From the first note it was painfully obvious that, although I've owned and listened to pretty "good" speakers over the last couple of decades, I'd never heard "great" before. They're in a league I truly didn't know existed, and can do things I'm incapable of describing. It's humbling.
Obviously I'm a pretty happy camper.
These replaced a pair of Dr. Hsu's CCB-8 coaxials paired with one of his subwoofers. I've never spoken an ill word of the CCB-8's before and I won't start now. They're competent as hell for the money, forgiving of poor sources and defining with better sources, worth every_single_penny of their price. At that number (in only my experience) I will recommend them above all else, because their quality is what taught me to appreciate what the R3's actually are.
If the KEF's blow up tonight I'll switch back to the CCB's and not regret what I'm hearing. They're that good. But I just went from a speaker which performs well above its' price at $800 to a speaker which performs well above its' price at $2000, and the difference is stark.
I have a difficult listening room, very crowded and exactly square at the 80Hz wavelength. The Hsus are a bit dependent on placement, I couldn't achieve their best placement in this room, and on occasion they sound less than their best as a result, losing soundstage. The KEFs simply don't care. I can't sit equilaterally with them. They don't care. One is further away from me than the other. They don't care.
They still vanish. There are no speakers, just music, and those sources which can define a soundstage still define that soundstage with sufficient accuracy that there's no doubt I'll be able to tweak speaker placement to correct the soundstage for my awkward circumstances. Because the R3's don't care. And I think that's their true value. They're good enough to overcome difficult circumstances and still be better than what preceded them.
Holy crap these R3's are good. I'm in my 60's, and obviously factor my known age-related hearing loss into my evaluations. These things make me think I haven't lost as much as I previously believed, they're that good.
Similar threads
