KEF R3 Speaker Review

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Someone is running his kefs with the KEF KF92 ? it's expesnive but it's looks very good.. You can high pass stereo and mono your mains
Measure really good for it's size, you can highpass any R series at 100hz~ with this sub
It's a win for your mains too..

https://www.novial.sk/documents-kef/kef-kf92-australian-hifi-2020.pdf

 

[mglobe]

Someone is running his kefs with the KEF KF92 ? it's expesnive but it's looks very good.. You can high pass stereo and mono your mains
Measure really good for it's size, you can highpass any R series at 100hz~ with this sub
It's a win for your mains too..
View attachment 227204View attachment 227206
View attachment 227207

https://www.novial.sk/documents-kef/kef-kf92-australian-hifi-2020.pdf

Not a direct answer to your question, but I’m running a pair of Rythmik L12’s in stereo with a xover At 80hz using a MiniDSP Flex. Sounds amazing.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Not a direct answer to your question, but I’m running a pair of Rythmik L12’s in stereo with a xover At 80hz using a MiniDSP Flex. Sounds amazing.

hi, seems to be a nice idea... wich speaker? R3?

 

[mglobe]

hi, seems to be a nice idea... wich speaker? R3?

Yes, R3

 

[Ciobi69]

I got my R3 with a diy 18 inch sealed sub with Dirac live , basically i got a full range setup, i love it,in the near future i will go to a bigger space,i hope it will work well

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Someone is running his kefs with the KEF KF92 ? it's expesnive but it's looks very good.. You can high pass stereo and mono your mains
Measure really good for it's size, you can highpass any R series at 100hz~ with this sub
It's a win for your mains too..
View attachment 227204View attachment 227206
View attachment 227207

https://www.novial.sk/documents-kef/kef-kf92-australian-hifi-2020.pdf

I run my Reference 3s with two KF92s for room mode correction. Nice for their size and work flawlessly. (A low profile/size was an optical requirement for me).

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I run my Reference 3s with two KF92s for room mode correction. Nice for their size and work flawlessly. (A low profile/size was an optical requirement for me).

OMG. Can you post pictures of my dreams setup? xD

 

[HarmonicTHD]

OMG. Can you post pictures of my dreams setup? xD

Thanks. Dream would be Reference 5 or Blade but they would be too obtrusive for the rest of the room (yes I also care about optics ;-)).

But to be honest I think the R3, R7, R11 are a very very good bang for their buck and with KF92 or other subs and EQ would be difficult to distinguish from the Reference series in a blind test. Me thinks.

(Sorry I don’t post pics of my personal stuff on the internet - thanks for understanding).

 

[DJNX]

Any kind R3 owner that can share the dimensions of the box?

 

[Fahzz]

18 d x 23.5 w x 22 h (inches) assuming you mean shipping box.

 

[DJNX]

18 d x 23.5 w x 22 h (inches) assuming you mean shipping box.

Thanks a lot!
I wonder if I can bother you one last time, by asking if the box states a total weight?

 

[Fahzz]

63.3 lbs gross weight. Enjoy them.

 

[DJNX]

63.3 lbs gross weight. Enjoy them.

Thanks again! Will do!

 

[Vacceo]

Someone is running his kefs with the KEF KF92 ? it's expesnive but it's looks very good.. You can high pass stereo and mono your mains
Measure really good for it's size, you can highpass any R series at 100hz~ with this sub
It's a win for your mains too..
View attachment 227204View attachment 227206
View attachment 227207

https://www.novial.sk/documents-kef/kef-kf92-australian-hifi-2020.pdf

While I think this approach is well thought, I cannot help but think what would be the difference with an LS50 meta. The R3 digs lower than the 50 for evident reasons so what advantages would have the R3 in this scenario?

That said, how is the setup working for you? Do you get an overall sound similar to a tower speaker? Let us know a bit more.

I run my Reference 3s with two KF92s for room mode correction. Nice for their size and work flawlessly. (A low profile/size was an optical requirement for me).

Same question for you sir: do your speakers sound like Reference 3's or close enough to not be able to distinguish them in a blind test?

 

[HarmonicTHD]

While I think this approach is well thought, I cannot help but think what would be the difference with an LS50 meta. The R3 digs lower than the 50 for evident reasons so what advantages would have the R3 in this scenario?

That said, how is the setup working for you? Do you get an overall sound similar to a tower speaker? Let us know a bit more.

Same question for you sir: do your speakers sound like Reference 3's or close enough to not be able to distinguish them in a blind test?

Not sure. I understand the question.
The Reference 3 with the KC62 did not sound great. Obviously the small KC62 could not make up for the Reference low frequency performance although the KC62 was better placed to minimize room modes.

Different for my two KF92. However this setup of course also sounds different than the Reference 3 alone. Also for obvious reason, which is more SPL capability down low and placed to minimize room modes (crossover at 80Hz).

Again I am not sure if that answers your question.

 

[Vacceo]

I run my Reference 3s with two KF92s for room mode correction. Nice for their size and work flawlessly. (A low profile/size was an optical requirement for me).

Not sure. I understand the question.
The Reference 3 with the KC62 did not sound great. Obviously the small KC62 could not make up for the Reference low frequency performance although the KC62 was better placed to minimize room modes.

Different for my two KF92. However this setup of course also sounds different than the Reference 3 alone. Also for obvious reason, which is more SPL capability down low and placed to minimize room modes (crossover at 80Hz).

Again I am not sure if that answers your question.

I missred the models. I asked thinking you have the Reference 1 (the bookshelves), not the 3 (towers) which you actually have.

The proper question should be how close is the Ref 1 + KS92 to the Ref 3 without subwoofers.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

I missred the models. I asked thinking you have the Reference 1 (the bookshelves), not the 3 (towers) which you actually have.

The proper question should be how close is the Ref 1 + KS92 to the Ref 3 without subwoofers.

Got it. No problem.

Sorry can’t answer the revised question as I never looked into, let alone tested or listened to that combination.

Edit. I just looked up the prices. Reference 1 with two KF92 costs roughly as much as the Reference 3 (Meta respectively). So yes interesting question. On second thought, yes the Reference 1 with two KF92 could be equal or better than the Reference 3 alone. As the KF92 have this active ca 1000 W DSP controlled woofers and the subs could be placed better in the room to minimize room modes. But this is just me thinking out loud. I guess one would have to dig out the measurements or even better measure the two systems in a room).

 

[Vacceo]

Well, that would also be the approach towards very high end passives like Perlisten bookshelves or high end actives such as Sigberg's: remove all bass below 90hz and place all the effort on subwoofers.

Considering the traditional recommendation of 80hz crossover, perhaps it is a "tried and true" design method for a system.

However, I agree with you on the measurement part, as that would definitely shed some light.

 

[mike70]

but the high pass crossovers aren't free ... crossovers adds phase / time troubles.

You need to "assemble" rightly the low / high pass crossovers. Other way is to use the natural frequency response in main speakers to set the low pass filter.

 

[holla]

I've been trying to work out the implications (for me!) of the sensitivity measurements that Amir made in this review. He wrote:

Deep bass though is lower at around 80 dB so amplification requirements will be significant.

I'm assuming that the test involved sending a consistent 2.83V rms signal to the speakers across a range of frequencies. The impedance of the R3 at 40Hz is 3.2Ohm so if my assumption is correct, this means that it takes 2.5W of power to generate 80dB at that frequency.

I tend to listen pretty quietly by the standards of this forum as far as I can tell. According to an iphone app, typical volume would be around 65dB at 1m from the speakers. Nevertheless I am sure it makes sense to build in headroom for dynamic range. But how much headroom would you build in? How much power into 4Ohm (despite the nominal 8 Ohm impedance of these speakers) would you want, for this kind of situation? It seems to me that 25W ought to be enough for my purposes, and any half-decent amp can do that or more, so I have little to worry about... But "anplification requirements will be significant" seems to push in the other direction.