KEF R3 vs R5

[bo_knows]

I’m looking at the R lineup of floorstanders as well. With the seven years it took to upgrade them last time around and the fact that they took bits from the Reference line and the LS50 I’m not sure they’d be next in line for the Meta treatment unless the Reference line also got it at the same time.

If they do, I’m hopeful we get some other cabinet/driver finish combinations. The walnut looks gorgeous I just don’t dig those rose gold drivers...

I wish KEF was like a Porsche and updating their speakers as often as 911 gets updated.
With their pace, it's more like a Corvette. LOL

 

[JRiggs]

I wouldn’t expect a new R line update anytime soon. The current series have only Ben out dice 2018. KEF doesn’t update too often.

 

[Descartes]

Well we can all speculate if KEF will update their line soon here are release dates:
- KEF blade 2011
- KEF blade 2014
- KEF reference 2016
- KEF R series 2018

 

[Zvu]

KEF LS50 Meta 2020
KEF KC62 2021

So next update should be sometime next year ?

 

[goldenears]

Kef Q series 2017

 

[stevenswall]

Kef needs an active R3 or LS50 with opposing side woofers.

Concerning the original post graphs, the one on the left is better.

Looking closer, that is the R3.

If the R3 doesn't go loud enough, you're exchanging better dispersion for a little potential SPL increase and not having to buy stands.

 

[Descartes]

Kef needs an active R3 or LS50 with opposing side woofers....

It is called the Blade

 

[thewas]

Blade isn't active though and "a tad" expensive (still great loudspeakers though, especially the newer Blade 2).

 

[stevenswall]

It is called the Blade

Too big, and passive if I recall correctly... But an active mini version with incredible bass would be great to test.

 

[Koeitje]

What Hi-Fi's lists seem to have a lot of weird choices do you know how they rank things?

They rank based on how much money they get from a brand.

 

[Tokyo_John]

Too big, and passive if I recall correctly... But an active mini version with incredible bass would be great to test.

I haven't seen any $20,000 or higher speakers that are active...but could be my ignorance/inexperience.

They rank based on how much money they get from a brand.

No, but they do tend to be especially partial to UK brands. They also like the Dali sound. But over all, they have very high "grade inflation" as almost everything they review gets a 4-5 rating.

 

[bo_knows]

I haven't seen any $20,000 or higher speakers that are active...but could be my ignorance/inexperience.

Grimm audio comes to my mind. You can add the subwoofers and be over $30,000 in a hurry.

https://www.grimmaudio.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&path=63&product_id=61

No, but they do tend to be especially partial to UK brands. They also like the Dali sound. But over all, they have very high "grade inflation" as almost everything they review gets a 4-5 rating.

 

[eyes-on-you]

The 7500Hz notch happens only directly on axis so I wouldn't be concerned with that. As someone who has had the R3 for about 6 months now, the biggest problem with them in my opinion is the region in the 2-4k range, most of the R series has it in some way and it is only evident in the early reflections, meaning it isn't a problem in the listening window. The R3 and R5 would be fairly similar in most ways and I think it would come down to whether you prefer towers or bookshelf speakers but the R3 is slightly smoother according to KEF's measurements. The R7 is actually the smoothest to me in that region but I'm not sure how much of an audible difference that would make.

What does mean r7 is smoothest in 2-4khz area?

Could you show me on the measurements graph?

 

[aarons915]

What does mean r7 is smoothest in 2-4khz area?

Could you show me on the measurements graph?

Sure check out the R series whitepaper here: https://us.kef.com/r7.html#attributedownloads

At the bottom are all of KEF's measurements, the green line is close to what the early reflections would be and you can see right around the 2500-3000Hz range there is a bit of peaking in most of the series but the R7 is smoother in that area. I know it doesn't seem like a big deal but EQ'ing that range took the edge off them and made them sound a lot smoother to my ears.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Did you listen to it far field or nearfield ?

Depending on circumstances it can be important, but i can not imagine someone listening R5 from 1.5 meter distance.

 

[Zvu]

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

View attachment 126574

i guess if the r5's if it's fit as well as my r300 in a 1.26x1.26x1.36 triangle XD

 

[ttimer]

Something else to consider. The tweeter on the R5 is not at the top of the speaker. In my room, it would placed well below seated ear level, and would need some base platform to lift it. With the R3, you need stands anyway for the best sound and probably can find the specific height for your room. To me, that made it easy to pass on the current R5 sale.

Due to the almost perfect vertical dispersion of the R series, tweeter height really shouldn’t matter much.
Im also pretty sure that KEF were not oblivious to the tweeter position. Tweeter height is almost identical for all R series floorstanders, this is clearly intentional.

 

[wgb113]

Due to the almost perfect vertical dispersion of the R series, tweeter height really shouldn’t matter much.
Im also pretty sure that KEF were not oblivious to the tweeter position. Tweeter height is almost identical for all R series floorstanders, this is clearly intentional.

They’re all 31.5” to be exact. Odd that they make the R3 stands so tall.

 

[eyes-on-you]

Due to the almost perfect vertical dispersion of the R series, tweeter height really shouldn’t matter much.
Im also pretty sure that KEF were not oblivious to the tweeter position. Tweeter height is almost identical for all R series floorstanders, this is clearly intentional.

I agree with you, tweeter slightly lower than my ears in listening position. No difference between up/down.