At more than five times the price I sure hope so!I am thinking the new Reference 1 Meta will be quite a bit better than the LS50 Meta. I am seriously considering getting a pair...but I am a bit of a KEF fanboy.
Hello Darkscience,I know I am late to this party but I just bought a pair of R3 and am completely blown away at the sound, (AHB2/DC3).
What made me look this thread up was so happy about this purchase that I started wondering about the Reference series. I read every single post.
My opinion will be that there should be no complaining about the price of the Reference series. That is what the R series is for, I mean, it hit me now, the R3 is one of the best bookshelf style speakers in the world. Having access to that but complaining that you want the Reference series and sort of bashing on KEF for price is kind of a ridiculous argument. If it is to much money for you and/or you do not see the value in it, then move on and get the R series. They are giving you the same sound, if not arguably better it sounds like in some peoples ears. It is a strange thing to complain about. I saw alot of car analogies buy I will add my own. Anyone play musical instruments? I play guitar, and own quite a few, the $1k guitar sounds just as good and sometime better than the $10k guitar. What you get with the $10k is hand carved wood, and an attention to craftsmanship detail that is obssesive but the CNC carved guitar is actually more perfect. Whats incredible, and something to surely drive someone like the OP crazy is, for the top if the line $10k + guitars they will take them out back and beat them up on the ground to make them look used and worn in...lol. Remember, pickup technology, (the part of the guitar that picks up the string vibrations), is the exact same from $1k to $10k+ and with EQ you can make them sound identical. But poeple pay for it because it is art to them and I imagine thats how KEF views there Reference line, audio science art, and there are those willing to pay for it. So like someone pointed out, we need to really appreciate that KEF is not skimping on the lower end stuff and making it sound close to the high end. I would infact never have bought a KEF if the mid range stuff did not sound as good, because that is what you are really asking them to do. They cant make the high end stuff sound any better, they would need to sacrifice the low end to please the elitist attitude of someone who has money burning in their pocket and wanta pure exclusivity, this again, is not what the Reference line is about for them, it is Art 100% to them by the simple fact they take pride in the handmade in the country of origin heritage. No different then Gibson, who for example takes pride in the fact their lower end stuff is still American made, just more machine work than hand artisan work.
I find it a strange argument indeed, let me ask you this, would making the speakers by machine in the UK and eliminating the hand work just to get half price please you? Because at that point in their eyes they are no better then the R, (of course with all the subtle material differences), except the sticker says made in UK. No, because that is not the point for them, it is 100% art and heritage, so really just get over the price and be thankful instead and delighted at the LS and R. If performance is all that mattters for the cost, well you have it in the LS and R, change the sticker in the back to made in UK if it makes you feel better.
Yea all good points, I think we are on the same page. My opinion was that complaining about the price is kinda nuts, each person can decide what they are willing to pay for what level of quality and sound. The R3 is a great value for those who do not want to step up to the mack daddy level. I personally would be willing to step up, I am a KEF fan now after listening to the R3, but probably out of reach for me right now. I believe the argument of the OP was that its not worth it for a diminishing return in sound but that argument IMO falls apart very quickly because if sound is the only thing that makes it worth more, then you can be happy with the R series, of course the Reference will max you out, but its not all about the sound at that point, there are other factors like hand crafted, quality of materials, engineering, heritage and prestige. I am jealous of your Ref 3, so beautiful.Hello Darkscience,
On top of what you said, the difference between R and Reference series was discussed in great detail before. Every part in the Reference series is maximized in comparison to R series. Starting from the binding posts, speaker stands, tunable bass reflex tubes, drivers, crossover parts, aluminum front baffle and etc.
It's a different product and it sounds different. Is it a good value proposition? That is for each individual to decide but for me to say that my Reference 3 speakers are almost as good as Blade 2 is a little reaching. Is Blade 2 worth an extra 10K when it measures similar to Ref 3? You see where I'm going with this.
Thank you! Nothing to be jealous about. I truly believe that anyone who sets their mind to own ANY of the KEF speakers can make it happen. I personally, wouldn't step up from R3 to Ref 1, only to Ref3 or Blade2. I don't have enough space in my dedicated home theater room or free time to enjoy the music to justify Blade 2. Not to mention mild tinnitus and aging ears.Yea all good points, I think we are on the same page. My opinion was that complaining about the price is kinda nuts, each person can decide what they are willing to pay for what level of quality and sound. The R3 is a great value for those who do not want to step up to the mack daddy level. I personally would be willing to step up, I am a KEF fan now after listening to the R3, but probably out of reach for me right now. I believe the argument of the OP was that its not worth it for a diminishing return in sound but that argument IMO falls apart very quickly because if sound is the only thing that makes it worth more, then you can be happy with the R series, of course the Reference will max you out, but its not all about the sound at that point, there are other factors like hand crafted, quality of materials, engineering, heritage and prestige. I am jealous of your Ref 3, so beautiful.
Basically Reference is a no comprise product, maxed out in every detail possible, with a prestigious brand name.
my impressions: https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ed-but-where-is-the-r-meta.30987/post-1171251Thank you! Nothing to be jealous about. I truly believe that anyone who sets their mind to own ANY of the KEF speakers can make it happen. I personally, wouldn't step up from R3 to Ref 1, only to Ref3 or Blade2. I don't have enough space in my dedicated home theater room or free time to enjoy the music to justify Blade 2. Not to mention mild tinnitus and aging ears.
Btw, congrats on your R3, and enjoy!
I am admittedly biased and big fan boy of KEF (currently KEF Ref 3 and started with R700, the predecessor to the R7).I´m wating till the end of this year to upgrade my system. I have a shortlist of electronics and that is the easy part, but speakers...
I´m torn between Perlisten R series and Kef R series. In the first case, the S series and the Reference (or Blade) in the second are way, way too expensive.
Looking at hard data they seem to be incredibly close contenders in terms of sound and capability, so any advice is welcome. I guess waiting will not hurt, as both Perlisten and KEF will probably release new stuff in the meantime.
I have been using Kef speakers for a couple decades. The upgrade comes from the fact that my current IQ series is third hand and though aging well, I think I can do quite a lot better.I am admittedly biased and big fan boy of KEF (currently KEF Ref 3 and started with R700, the predecessor to the R7).
Just love the precise soundstage of their coaxials especially in reverby modern living rooms which you don’t want to treat for aesthetic reasons. Due to that characteristic speech is often better understood when also used for movie watching.
The KEFs somewhat narrower directivity is often perceived better as it doesn’t generate as much reflection as the some of the contenders with wider dispersion exhibit. But this is very much subjective and a matter of taste of course. Maybe try both at home and then decide.
Most certainly. The R series measured really nice.I have been using Kef speakers for a couple decades. The upgrade comes from the fact that my current IQ series is third hand and though aging well, I think I can do quite a lot better.
Really want to see that review.Erin already announced that he has a Reference 1 Meta to be tested. So we can have hard facts soon and better compare LS50, R3 and Ref 1 Meta
I'm exacly the same way. My speakers are in a small room 12' x 12' x 8', so something with a wider directivity will involve the room more at higher frequencies, and, I think, compromise the imaging I hear on my LS 50 Metas. I also have no use for room treatment. Would clash with my Banksy artwork. Finally, I do a 5.1 home theater, and I believe narrow directivity works better with home theater set ups where the ambiance is supposed to come from what's encoded directly in the surround channels, rather than from room reflections. I do see how if you're in a bigger room listening to 2 channel, something like the Salon 2's might sound positively panoramic. Just not in my listening phone booth though.I am admittedly biased and big fan boy of KEF (currently KEF Ref 3 and started with R700, the predecessor to the R7).
Just love the precise soundstage of their coaxials especially in reverby modern living rooms which you don’t want to treat for aesthetic reasons. Due to that characteristic speech is often better understood when also used for movie watching.
The KEFs somewhat narrower directivity is often perceived better as it doesn’t generate as much reflection as the some of the contenders with wider dispersion exhibit. But this is very much subjective and a matter of taste of course. Maybe try both at home and then decide.
Really want to see that review.
oooof Perlisten is quivering in their boots right now.I believe it has the best EIR of any passive speaker I've measured so far. Or that I've seen measured by anyone else. I'd have to double check, but I also believe it's the best EIR of any speaker (passive or active/powered DSP) that I've seen measured to date.
IOW, Kef pretty much nailed it. Whether it's worth the price increase is not my call to make but I'd say that if someone wanted to step up from the R3 to this, it's a justified jump, IMHO.
If it was you guys, would you trade a pair of Cornwall IV for a pair of Reference 3? I currently own a pair of R3 that I love, (and have until June to return), but this trade fell in my lap. Or are the R3 similar enough that I should keep them and enjoy the R3 and continue to enjoy the CW IV.oooof Perlisten is quivering in their boots right now.
Could you please share your measurements of your reference 1 meta? I would love to compare the reference 1 meta and the r3I believe it has the best EIR of any passive speaker I've measured so far. Or that I've seen measured by anyone else. I'd have to double check, but I also believe it's the best EIR of any speaker (passive or active/powered DSP) that I've seen measured to date.
IOW, Kef pretty much nailed it. Whether it's worth the price increase is not my call to make but I'd say that if someone wanted to step up from the R3 to this, it's a justified jump, IMHO.