• 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 R5 Meta worthy upgrade to Dynaudio Audience 72?

gorman

Active Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2020
Messages
239
Likes
157
Location
Italy
As the title describes, I want to upgrade my front speakers from my old Dynaudio Audience 72.
During the past year I have invested considerably in acoustic treatment for my room, plus I have Dirac DLBC license for my Denon 3800H.
As such, and given the good results I have gotten from acoustic treatment plus Dirac, I have started considering stepping up a notch for my fronts.

Current configuration is Audience 72 left and right, Audience 122C center, Audience 42W surrounds, Polk Atrium 5 for Atmos and two SVS SB1000 subwoofers. A 5.2.4 setup.
Room is 4.85m x 3.72m (15.9 x 12.2 feet), ceiling at 2.9m (9.5 feet) .

Listening levels for music sit between 75 and 80db on average (these are the peaks), when I'm really listening to music. I measured these with a SPL meter set on slow response on a variety of content. Hope it's a useful enough information.

I currently am satisfied of sound pressure levels. MLP is about 2.4m (7.9 feet) from front and left speakers, 2.2m (7.2 feet) from centre. Ceiling mounted Atmos are pointed at MLP with angles within Atmos recommendations. I listen to lots of music in a variety of genres. Music is important, hence stereo performance is important (I love 5.1 and Atmos music but catalog is limited). But I also love watching movies and TV shows.

So the question is: after reading reviews and looking at Erin’s measurements (and spinorama.org’s rankings), plus considering I’d be using subs and equalisation, am I right in believing KEF R5 Meta will sound great and hopefully better than my current Dynaudio (which already are satisfying)? Size of the speakers would be ok. I dont’ want bigger towers.

I would probably buy a R6 Meta centre speaker to go with them, thus changing the whole front bed layer.
Curious about the need/advantage of getting extra amplification for the three frontal speakers too. I know amplification is not my AVR’s strong point.

Thanks in advance for your inputs.

EDIT: forgot a question I wanted to ask. Is the coaxial tweeter/mid approach useful to reduce directivity from the centre speaker? Since it has to sit below my TV (angled toward MLP), I would value an improvement in being less able to tell when sound comes from the centre speaker. Some multichannel music mixes are particularly bad for this.
 
Last edited:
While I wait for some helpful insight, I have been doing lots of reading in this subsection.

And a question arises: considering spinorama data, do these KEF punch so above their price category as measurements would suggest? Especially in reference to the EQ+sub values, which I suppose closely mimic my situation (two subs + Dirac Live Bass Control).
Or there are other qualities that spinorama fails to evaluate?

I also want to add that I intentionally choose to roll off a bit frequencies below 30hZ, as those frequencies make the actual walls of my building vibrate (resonance at some specific frequency I have not isolated). Not a huge problem for me, as I'm not a fan of extra low frequencies.
 
Also give the Q11 Meta a consideration. Gives you more low end for less money.

1736604955753.png


1736604986293.png
 
Also give the Q11 Meta a consideration. Gives you more low end for less money.

They are bigger and I have two subs for low end. Plus, considering R11 Meta, I am not sure they would end up measuring better. Unless I'm misunderstanding the way spinorama.org handles rankings and scores.
 
Keep in mind - the fine differences are probably inaudible to normal people. In the chart above the main difference is a significant delta in the low end. Your subs are still in play and if you have highpass capabilities - you can ensure that distortion is kept at bay, by rolling off the mains. The PIR above 100Hz is nearly identical while DI looks to be flatter - so may as well save some bucks.

OTOH - Q v R - less bragging rights? See if you can test at the shop. Bring a sound level meter (even an app on the phone will do in a pinch) and set volume by playing pink noise (you can find a track on any streaming service).
 
OTOH - Q v R - less bragging rights? See if you can test at the shop. Bring a sound level meter (even an app on the phone will do in a pinch) and set volume by playing pink noise (you can find a track on any streaming service).
You missed the point where I said they're too big. The room is not big. Every centimetre/inch counts.

Q11 Meta footprint is 317 x 380 mm (W x D).
R5 Meta footprint is 272 x 344 (W x D).

Those centimetres, unfortunately, matter for my furniture, space available, etc.

Hoped to get more replies but maybe Audience speakers are too old for people to judge, I don't know... in absence of input I'll trust spinorama.org and be done.
 
You missed the point where I said they're too big. The room is not big. Every centimetre/inch counts.

Q11 Meta footprint is 317 x 380 mm (W x D).
R5 Meta footprint is 272 x 344 (W x D).

Those centimetres, unfortunately, matter for my furniture, space available, etc.

Hoped to get more replies but maybe Audience speakers are too old for people to judge, I don't know... in absence of input I'll trust spinorama.org and be done.
Q7 Meta is smaller(including the depth) than Q11 Meta, yet very close in performance. Perhaps the Q7 Meta will fit your room.

Having owned the Dynaudio Audience 82 for several years, I would think either the new Q Meta series or the standard R series or R Meta series towers will be a large upgrade from the rather old Audience speakers. I was never much impressed with the Audience 82 tweeter. As to the center speaker, it seems that the three-way Q6 Meta or R6 Meta center speakers would be a huge upgrade over the small two-way Audience 122C.

I'm currently looking to buy either the Q7 or Q11 Meta towers.
 
EDIT: forgot a question I wanted to ask. Is the coaxial tweeter/mid approach useful to reduce directivity from the centre speaker? Since it has to sit below my TV (angled toward MLP), I would value an improvement in being less able to tell when sound comes from the centre speaker. Some multichannel music mixes are particularly bad for this.
Anyone with input on this?
 
Q7 Meta is smaller(including the depth) than Q11 Meta, yet very close in performance. Perhaps the Q7 Meta will fit your room.
I have gathered more info, in the meantime. The fact that they can (should) be placed off axis (like pointing at the back wall and not toward the MLP point) would actually allow me to fit R7 Meta as floorstanders.

Much as I respect the work Kef has done on the new Q series, I'm aiming to change "category" of speakers. These are most likely the last floorstanders of my life, considering how long I've kept the Audience 72. As such, I'd like to give myself a nice gift... R11 are too pricey and the room is definitely not big enough to justify them, I think.

Still trying to understand whether the coaxial tweeter/mid means less perceived "directionality" from the center speaker. I use an Aperta 300 stand which currently points to MLP, holding the Dynaudio A122C.
 
I have gathered more info, in the meantime. The fact that they can (should) be placed off axis (like pointing at the back wall and not toward the MLP point) would actually allow me to fit R7 Meta as floorstanders.

Much as I respect the work Kef has done on the new Q series, I'm aiming to change "category" of speakers. These are most likely the last floorstanders of my life, considering how long I've kept the Audience 72. As such, I'd like to give myself a nice gift... R11 are too pricey and the room is definitely not big enough to justify them, I think.

Still trying to understand whether the coaxial tweeter/mid means less perceived "directionality" from the center speaker. I use an Aperta 300 stand which currently points to MLP, holding the Dynaudio A122C.
Here is a new review of the KEF Q11 Meta. The Q7 Meta should have similar performance.

 
Here is a new review of the KEF Q11 Meta. The Q7 Meta should have similar performance.
Yes, they measure very similarly and the Q7 has actually even a bit more bass 40 and 80 Hz:

newplot (1).png
 
Here is a new review of the KEF Q11 Meta. The Q7 Meta should have similar performance.
Yes, they measure very similarly and the Q7 has actually even a bit more bass 40 and 80 Hz

I feel like I'm missing something...

Three different people are pushing for the Q series while I've expressed a somewhat clear indication that I'm interested in the R series.
Could you elaborate on reasons why? Do you think they're going to offer the same quality? By reading around it seemed to me that the tonality is not the only thing that matters, there are other indicators from other measurements.
Or is Kef sticking to scientific measurements for speaker design but then tries to sell the R series as added snake oil when compared to the Q series.

Help me understand your point of view. I don't want to waste money. But I'd like to get the best I can for the budget I have. Thanks.
 
I feel like I'm missing something...

Three different people are pushing for the Q series while I've expressed a somewhat clear indication that I'm interested in the R series.
Could you elaborate on reasons why? Do you think they're going to offer the same quality? By reading around it seemed to me that the tonality is not the only thing that matters, there are other indicators from other measurements.
Or is Kef sticking to scientific measurements for speaker design but then tries to sell the R series as added snake oil when compared to the Q series.

Help me understand your point of view. I don't want to waste money. But I'd like to get the best I can for the budget I have. Thanks.
I personally am not pushing on anything, just replied on that comment about Q7 vs Q11 Meta, I apologise if that caused some confusion .

But since you ask, here are my 5 Eurocents of advice:

If you plan to use sub and EQ and the not small price difference for you is not an issue I would go for the R5 Meta despite being myself a Q7 owner as except in the bass they have the better drivers and also stiffer cabinets and their different tuning can be to a big part compensated on all options per EQ as all of their directivities are good. But the value for money is better on the new Q series as the R5 is more than double price compared to the Q7 for example but definitely neither a technical or audible double improvement, which is normal though on most product categories.
 
I feel like I'm missing something...

Three different people are pushing for the Q series while I've expressed a somewhat clear indication that I'm interested in the R series.
Could you elaborate on reasons why? Do you think they're going to offer the same quality? By reading around it seemed to me that the tonality is not the only thing that matters, there are other indicators from other measurements.
Or is Kef sticking to scientific measurements for speaker design but then tries to sell the R series as added snake oil when compared to the Q series.

Help me understand your point of view. I don't want to waste money. But I'd like to get the best I can for the budget I have. Thanks.
I think you're going to get more high frequency energy with the R Meta series than Q Meta series. But aside from that, it seems the Q Meta performance is pretty close. It seems from reviews I've seen that the Q Meta series is going to sound a bit "soft" or "dark", compared to the R Meta or Reference series, and certainly compared to some other brands.
 
I feel like I'm missing something...

Three different people are pushing for the Q series while I've expressed a somewhat clear indication that I'm interested in the R series.
R series Meta are of course better. Frequency response isn’t everything and you have the bass already covered by two svs subs. In the Q11 Meta Erin review thread you can read rhat someone found the R series more detailled. Way more important than low end extension.

Some people want a lot of speaker for little money, there fits the Q series from Kef. Better are R series, LS60, Reference series and Blade. And better is what you want.
 
R series Meta are of course better.
Not everything is better though, for example not only the bass tuning but also the wider directivity of the Q series due to its smaller Uni-Q drivers compared to the R series can be advantageous for some rooms and personal preferences. The Q series sounds darker because its on-axis response is also tuned darker, but if you EQ it similar to the one of the R series it might sound even more detailed and "wide", see directivity indexes below:

newplot (2).png

In the end nothing is perfect and the only important thing is to find the best compromise for each individual requirements and preferences.
 
I personally am not pushing on anythin
Sorry. Pushing might be too strong a word or even the completely wrong one. English is not my native language and sometimes I miss the nuances that are so important for a peaceful and constructive discussion.

Nobody is pushing. Drawing my attention to might be the better word?

Thanks for your reply. I will think about it before carrying on the discussion. But I wanted to push the "push" thing out if the way immediately.
 
Sorry. Pushing might be too strong a word or even the completely wrong one. English is not my native language and sometimes I miss the nuances that are so important for a peaceful and constructive discussion.

Nobody is pushing. Drawing my attention to might be the better word?

Thanks for your reply. I will think about it before carrying on the discussion. But I wanted to push the "push" thing out if the way immediately.
You are welcome and no worries, I didn't take even take it in a bad way initially. :)
 
You are welcome
Regarding the R5/subs/equalization thing, would some pictures/drawings with measurement help? There is not much I can change/move around in the room, but there's a place where I could add a third subwoofer. Maybe that could further help in smoothing out/extending bass response for the R5. And maybe it would be money better spent than going with R7.

My main consideration for R5/R7 is that I wouldn't want to risk setting the crossover higher than 80Hz, for localization worries. But on the other hand it seems to me that the R5 are already strained when reaching 80.

Do you have any idea about the question regarding directivity/localization of the center speaker with a coax M/T?
 
I shall be watching this thread with interest.

I'm also thinking of eventually getting one last floorstanding speaker upgrade before I shuffle off this mortal coil.

I've had my current, Monitor Audio R952MD for, I think, about 30 years. I'm also very happy with them, and also pair them with a sub. Albeit, just one Elac Debut S10.

I have pretty much exactly your room size too, and the Kef R5 Meta is also top of my list!, having finally come to my senses about abandoning a pursuit of ribbon tweeter options.

I'll only be listening to music though, not films, and will be sticking with 2:1 stereo.

I'm sorry I can't add anything useful for you, except that I heard some Kef 105.2 in a vintage hifi shop, and they were superb!.... to my ears. Kef is also local to me, and I have much respect for the company.

I really like the way you've looked into this, and the good way you're curious as to why you've been steered towards the Q series, so I'll be interested to see what you end up with, and why.

Good luck!
 
Back
Top Bottom