KEF R8 Meta Dolby Atmos Speaker Review

[Andysu]

+1 and preaching to the choir. That said, I am scientifically interested/curious to see how it measures when done that way.

My home system is the JBL S/2600 which has the 4660’s horn and compression driver for the top end. I have add the UT-405 to fill in the sound above 16 kHz which is the 2405 slot tweeter.

4660 used on the ceiling for overheads , x 40 should do it

 

[Vacceo]

This speaker is not made for 40Hz. It is ca 20dB down at 40Hz plus look at the distortion at 40Hz and 86dB SPL. And how could it, it is a mid/upper driver and meant to be integrated into a surround system with subs.

Looking at the size and drivers is enough to know that it should reach probably 90-100 Hz at the lowest.

Not a problem, though, because that low, sound is not directional, so let the subwoofers do their job.

Still, it would be interesting to experience these speakers up on a wall as height channels.

 

[Mauro]

Interesting that we see different things. I see that mid band dip in the Q150, Q350, LS50, LS50 Meta, even the recent ceiling/in wall specific model reviewed here. All just slight variations of the same thing,

When you say tuning choice: if you mean it wasn’t optimised for perfectly flat on axis response; then I agree- The application is not designed for listening on axis- so it would not make sense to optimise it for on axis. The design target would be to (total) sound power.

If you mean tuning choice as in the was a deliberate choice to add extra passive crossover components in there to create a dip, no I don’t think so.

My guess is that it is designed for total sound power, or predicted in-room response.

But then again I think we need a little more science than this. Does the PIR correlate with with the LP when the speaker is mounted on a front speaker? Or mounted in the wall?

Bring a coaxial and having nearly equal horizontal and vertical off axis responses; and with such well controlled directivity, my guess is that it quite immune to placement considerations. I don’t think the preference score makes sense here.

Take any other your KEF LS50/LS50Meta/UniQ and sit it on its back, perhaps place hard foam or hardcover book as wedge to tilt it and then listen to your favourite music. Sounds surprisingly spacious, but not quite right for stereo music,
But it works well for multichannel / surround/Atmos.

This graph reminded me a lot the measurement I performed on my KEF EGG speakers, from the valley in the upper mids to the treble…

 

[Andysu]

JBL control 1 which seen in few actual cinemas odeon smaller screens mounted to ceiling with that bracket that was 1990's and also same set up at smaller Empire 3 at Empire Leicester square . not seen kef being used at any cinema JBL control 1 cheaper and popular for model made in mid late 1980's still popular
JBL are practically used on all dubbing stages and at cinemas for reproduction

i used the JBL control 1 for my own overhead matrix surround for while , then got a atmos processor and changed the control 1 for JBL 8330A ( cheap as fish and chips ) privces now , well few no years ago , but keep watching bargains show up cheap than postage price

 

[Mauro]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the KEF R8 Meta Dolby Atmos Surround Speaker. It was kindly drop shipped to me by a member and costs US $1,600 for a pair.
View attachment 284333
The R8 meta is very compact speaker meant to be put on top of your tower surrounds (or bookshelves on stand) to fire up at the ceiling. The reflections then bounce back onto the seating locations giving a (diffused) sense of height. It eliminates the need to cut holes in the ceiling and ability to adjust their aim at will. The R8 meta is gorgeously finished and feels exceptionally solid (the "orange peel" look is reflections from my lightbox, not the speaker).

The binding posts are on the "back" side which is the taller side on the left in above picture:
View attachment 284334

There is provision for wall mounting which I assume it means surround duty with them pointing down toward listeners from side walls:
View attachment 284335

I had to do some thinking on how to measure this speaker. Clearly you don't put it on its back side in front of you and listen facing them! I realized that the aim is for you to hear its on-axis response as bounced by the ceiling and therefore, I should measure it with driver 90 degrees to microphone as I would any normal speaker. Imagine this position:
View attachment 284336

It was tricky to devise a way to securely mount it to the Klippel NFS stand but I managed to do that. Reference axis is naturally the tweeter in the center of the coaxial driver. There is a grill but as usual, I did without it.

I originally wanted to listen to them and then do the review. As you can imagine, testing an Atmos speaker is non-trivial but I have an idea on how to do it. I thought I post the measurements now since there are a few interesting things that apply to this execution and R8 Meta series in general. On the former, Dolby has strict requirement on crossover design of Dolby Atmos speakers as to reduce horizontal bleed from the speaker to the listeners. In an ideal world, all the sound would shoot up the wall and none would come from the sides.

KEF R8 Meta Dolby Atmos Surround Speaker Measurements
Again, keep in mind that on-axis frequency response means the direct sound that is going to shoot up the ceiling and reflect back to one position:
View attachment 284337

What stands out is the notch between 1 and 2 kHz (crossover frequency is 2.5 kHz). I am 99% sure this is Dolby imposed. If someone has seen the Dolby OEM requirements for the crossover, please post so we can confirm. Putting that aside, we see a lazy but wide (low Q) peaking between 5 and 10 kHz. Is that intentional tool? I don't know. The grill will attenuate that a bit. Directivity is superb (best ever seen?) so equalization should be trivial here for both factors.

I will give you the early window response even though you have to perform mental gymnastics to figure out how to map them to a speaker that is up firing at an angle:
View attachment 284338

The perfection in both horizontal and vertical axis cements in your eyes and brains when you look at beam width and directivity measurements:
View attachment 284339

View attachment 284340
View attachment 284341

Puts a smile on my face just looking at them!

This is a sealed and super compact speaker. How will it do in distortion department? Turns out very well thank you:
View attachment 284342

View attachment 284343

Yes, bass distortion rises at 96 dBSPL but you will be crossing these over with your sub. During the frequency sweep, even at 96 kHz, what I heard was smooth other than a tiny impairment here and there.

The meta material's job is to absorb unwanted reflections. Although it is mostly there for high frequencies, the entire response seems to be free of resonances:
View attachment 284344

Finally, here is the step response:
View attachment 284345

Conclusions
Starting with the "bones" of the speaker, there is clearly some good engineering design and magic is going on with the R8 Meta. Love to test their other speakers. For now, this up firing speaker seems to have characteristics that many other speakers would be jealous of. There are just a couple of frequency response variations that I hope we get to understand as to a) whether they are forced and b) whether the idea behind them is correct. If (b) is right, it would solve a huge problem as far as deploying these upfiring speakers instead of major hassle of sticking speaker in ceiling. More on this if I get a chance to listen to them.

For now, based on what I am seeing, I am going to highly recommend the KEF R8 Meta Dolby Atmos Surround Speakers.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Near-field analysis might help understanding the frequency response anomalies?

 

[doodlebro]

I use up firing speakers for Atmos and I can tell you that they are able to reproduce overhead effects very well. Not sure where the “snake oil” comment is coming from because the effect is convincing.

Up-firing produces a much better diffuse effect from the height channels since the sound is literally diffusing off of the ceiling. In ceiling really isn't worth it unless you can get 12+ feet above the listening position; up-firing makes the ceiling feel much higher than it is, as long as sound isn't leaking there's no issues.

I think the general disdain for up-firing is a combination of buyer's remorse and not actually playing around with it. I got great results by putting my ELACs on speaker stands and elevating them an extra foot and a half from my LR. Noticed a bit of leakage when they were sitting directly on top.

 

[Andysu]

JBL tone 3.0 price cheap

kef tone 1.8
bose lol -0.6 maybe try bose 141 for atmos bouncy sound

the kef looks like $60 , not $1600 , that way kef fan can add x40 kef r8 to the ceiling

 

[pseudoid]

Dufus like me does not understand a speaker like this that performs so "well" but I don't even understand how it was measured with the Klippel to begin with:
Was it measured as with typical direct firing speakers, at the same axis? Yet, it's appears to be destined to be an up-firing speaker and w/the intention to bask the listener with ceiling reflections? I thought the whole idea was to prevent as much of such reflections (and all that accompanies that indirect path to the ears) as possible.
If Atmos is your thing and the accompanying movie's audio is properly produced for Atmos environment: then, why would anyone would make things even more complex by the FREE bouncy-bouncies?
It seems that the proper locations for finding the sweet-placement of such a speaker seems impossible, as has been mentioned already.
I wonder how they would really sound as a pair used/placed as L/R desktop speakers? [not as Atmos fill speakers]
I was forced to vote for the HeadlessPanther and I am only one of three that voted that way.

OT: Minor typo:

.... Is that intentional tool? I don't know.

From <https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...kef-r8-meta-dolby-atmos-speaker-review.44520/>

 

[Cote Dazur]

Is it really necessary to have atmos/ceiling speakers for over 3000€ (for 4 of them)?

Such a good question, I guess we will not see any measurement of a total Atmos system, with those and any other to compare with to help us decide, as once they are in a room, all bets are off, too many parameters will interfere with measuring the sound in that room to be relevant. So necessary? No way to know, but Amir measurements show that they can do the job, like probably many others, but will probably be more flexible about where they can be located than some others.
On the other hand, they will be hard to beat for bragging rights, right up there with anything Genelec.

 

[Andysu]

Is it really necessary to have atmos/ceiling speakers for over 3000€ (for 4 of them)?

Wouldn’t something like JBL Control One for 200€/4pcs be enough for atmos applications?

all my JBL 8330A overhead surrounds way cheaper than kef and be surprised how much bass they put out and loudness , and price , fish and chips compared to kef overpriced my overhead cost less than kef $999

used JBL control 1 for my own matrix overhead surround no years ago
now presently using JBL fish and chips the price £ few no years ago , i grabbed them by the JBL all of them and was one shy found ebay usa and grabbed it by the JBL , even the postage was cheap
JBL 8330A x9 not even anywhere near to half the price of kef r8 , yet running x9 on the ceiling

the side/rear JBL 8330 mkII came from famous twickenham film studios , lot of famous films mixed on those surrounds and , fish and chips cheap

 

[Billy Budapest]

Up-firing produces a much better diffuse effect from the height channels since the sound is literally diffusing off of the ceiling. In ceiling really isn't worth it unless you can get 12+ feet above the listening position; up-firing makes the ceiling feel much higher than it is, as long as sound isn't leaking there's no issues.

I think the general disdain for up-firing is a combination of buyer's remorse and not actually playing around with it. I got great results by putting my ELACs on speaker stands and elevating them an extra foot and a half from my LR. Noticed a bit of leakage when they were sitting directly on top.

Mine are actually mounted on speaker stands on top of my TV console, behind my TV. Pictures are posted below. The Atmos speakers are completely hidden by the screen, yet they manage to bounce the sound off the ceiling very well.

 

[Billy Budapest]

 

[Rottmannash]

I'm using a pair of KEF "egg" satellite speakers as front heights, which are around 16 inches from the ceiling. As a previous poster commented I don't notice much output from them, as it's difficult to determine how much of the sound overhead is those or the rear/rear surrounds. Luckily the AVR has a setting where one enters the distance from the ceiling-however I have read Dirac Live doesn't accurately measure or set front heights which "bounce" off the ceiling.

 

[amirm]

Just an update... KEF folks are investigating the dip as it is not to spec (nor a requirement from Dolby). Please standby until they get back to me.

 

[BoredErica]

I'd like to try Atmos one day. But none of my music/video games benefit from it I think?

 

[amirm]

I suspect that the interface where the the cone’s edge meets the rubber surround is responsible for dip seen around 1.5KHz.

It is a common issue that affects many mid-woofers with big roll surround, Eg. LS50 loudspeaker. It is anisotropic, so with DSP you can improve it somewhat but you can’t fully massage this out, because it exhibits different characteristics at different directions.

Not in this case:

Early window and even power response have the same dip. You can see how there is no disruptions at all between 1 and 2 kHz. So EQ would work extremely well.

 

[AndreaT]

Excellent speaker, save for the mid-range dip. Still, it would be useful to know more about the spectrum Atmos sends to the channels oriented toward (or firing from) the ceiling...up to 64 channels...enormous amount of work to make anything above a 2.1 or 2.2 system sound right, as acoustic of an enclosed space is a very, very complex science.

 

[tktran303]

@Maiky76 EQed it.

But it’s still a bit funky/wonky.

I wonder if it got damaged in shipping?

@amirm You sound as confident as chatGPT; i thought you might be using AI to speed up report writing.

That would a dream…

 

[Deleted member 48726]

I'm clearly off the wagon on the whole review of this thing.
-Why would anyone cash out this kind of money for that small speaker?
-The speaker is intended to reflect sound off of ceilings.
-Why does it even make sense to measure it?
-Will the reflected sound not differ immensely anyway due to different ceilings?
-How much sound is actually sent to this kind of speaker in a surround config? -Isn't it mainly ambience?
-With this in mind I acknowledge the ok measurements but do they really matter for the intended use?

I'm confused where this fits in.

 

[exm]

I'm clearly off the wagon on the whole review of this thing.
-Why would anyone cash out this kind of money for that small speaker?
-The speaker is intended to reflect sound off of ceilings.
-Why does it even make sense to measure it?
-Will the reflected sound not differ immensely anyway due to different ceilings?
-How much sound is actually sent to this kind of speaker in a surround config? -Isn't it mainly ambience?
-With this in mind I acknowledge the ok measurements but do they really matter for the intended use?

I'm confused where this fits in.

If you see my post earlier, I'm using these speakers as height surrounds. My processor upmixes any 5.1 signal to 5.2.6 (my current configured). So to answer your questions:
-Why would anyone cash out this kind of money for that small speaker?
My main speakers are Reference 5, Reference 4c and R3 Meta. These speakers aren't that expensive compared to the rest of my setup.
-The speaker is intended to reflect sound off of ceilings.
No, it's not. It can. But you can also use this speaker as a traditional surround speaker.
-Why does it even make sense to measure it?
Because people like to know how this measures?
-Will the reflected sound not differ immensely anyway due to different ceilings?
No idea, I don't use the Atmos reflection.
-How much sound is actually sent to this kind of speaker in a surround config? -Isn't it mainly ambience?
Depends. With Spatial Audio it gets full-range. With upmixers it's usually more ambience-like.
-With this in mind I acknowledge the ok measurements but do they really matter for the intended use?
Yes, see above my system/usage.