KEF Reference 5 VS Blade 2 vs Muon

[Ron Texas]

The KEF blade looks like the spaceships in arrival. I would love to have a pair.

 

[Pdxwayne]

My local dealer has all sorts of KEF speakers and I auditioned Blade 1&2, Reference 1,3,&5, and R series before the pandemic.

I much prefer the Reference series over the R series. Unfortunately, anything larger than Reference 1 revealed the show room bass modes issues, thus I suspect that those bigger Reference and Blade are not really small/mid size room friendly if one don't plan to use eq.

 

[Jukebox]

Muon's xover.View attachment 153853

Kef never had the fancies Xover parts inside; Mid level Bowers speakers have Mundorh and air core coils and the 800 Series are useing aluminum back plate ... etc; Then again you don't listen to individual components but the overall sound.

 

[MarkWinston]

Out of curiosity, why are you really interested in what Kef can do with their real high end stuff?

Because Im interested. Thats why. Who isnt?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Reference series are larger than r series, the adventage is you can put the R series in smaller places..
R7 is 32kg and ref3 50kg?

 

[Frank Dernie]

Muon, Blade and Blade 2. Guess KEF screwed up the biggest one huh...View attachment 153852

Not ruined just well beyond the point of worthwhile diminishing returns IMO.
It is £140,000 per pair!

 

[Pearljam5000]

Does the Blade 2 has the Meta technology?
Anyways it looks stunning

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

Does the Blade 2 has the Meta technology?
Anyways it looks stunning

Nope, i think they are going to update the Reference series, they are from 2015?
-------------
I find the R series and Reference very close in SQ, the R series properly integrated in the room doesn't gonna show any weakness because both have a fine engineering loudspeaker, the thing that i see that is too far is their price, also for the reference series are you going to need a larger room, the R series gonna sound better in smaller places

 

[MarkWinston]

Does the Blade 2 has the Meta technology?
Anyways it looks stunning

Im not sure about the Blades but Ive heard that the Muons have been thru a few revisions since its release, probably got the Meta tech along the way.

 

[fun]

Pre-ASR and Toole's book, my dream speakers were the B&W 802x. Now, with better understanding of speaker measurements (i.e. FR, Directivity etc.), it's Kef Blade Two . Practically, since I'm into multi-channel setup, a pair of Reference One as fronts, Reference 2c as center, and LS Meta or R3 as surround plus properly integrated subs would be the endgame setup for me.

 

[Jukebox]

Does the Blade 2 has the Meta technology?
Anyways it looks stunning

Not yet but eventually all of the Kef speakers will have it.

 

[Soniclife]

For me the Muon looks odd and not very engineering driven, I might be later convinced otherwise because i didn't dig that deep into them.

I've never looked into then properly, but theoretically a wide baffle Kef could be very interesting, I'd like to think that when they replace the blade they turn them 90 degrees, and make them active.

 

[MarkWinston]

Nope, i think they are going to update the Reference series, they are from 2015?
-------------
I find the R series and Reference very close in SQ, the R series properly integrated in the room doesn't gonna show any weakness because both have a fine engineering loudspeaker, the thing that i see that is too far is their price, also for the reference series are you going to need a larger room, the R series gonna sound better in smaller places

On the contrary, I find the Reference series to be far away from the R series. I have not heard the Blades but the R series dont sound anyway as good as the Reference. Heard both in a medium sized (maybe 50 - 60 sqm) heavily treated showroom. Is it worth the price difference in sq alone? Definitely, especially to enthusiasts.

 

[richard12511]

For someone using subs, I would say Blade2 > Blade > Muon. Muon is most expensive because it's more a statement work of art piece. I think the actual technology is much older and less sophisticated than the modern Kef designs.

 

[Ron Texas]

There is a lot of guessing, making of claims and general pontificating going on here. If one wants to compare the R11 to the Reference 5 put them both on a Klippel and look at the measurements first. Then, do a double blind comparison. At, $20 large, I find myself very skeptical of the notion the Ref 5 is any more than marginally better than the R11 for $6k. The few existing published reviews (measurements included) tend to support my view. At $200k the Muon isn't even on the same page.

 

[blueone]

The KEF blade looks like the spaceships in arrival. I would love to have a pair.

I've heard the Blade, twice. Disappointing bass for their size and price ($32K/pair); they definitely need subs for the 20-40Hz octave in a large room. I like the look, but they're definitely not on my short list. I didn't like them anywhere near as much as I remember liking the 207/2 in 2009/2010, which I still think is the best overall speaker KEF ever made.

 

[steve59]

I have the blade 1 the PO bought new may 2020. The only difference between the 1 and 2 are bass drivers . At the last Axpona kef had the muon’s being drivin by Hegel gear. the room was full of kids off their leashes so serious listening was out and they looked like the Super Bowl trophy an hour after everyone’s drooled all over it. Lol. Stereophile did a review on the ref 5 and gets into the differences from the blade/2. Sometimes when something’s right it doesn’t need fixing. I can drive the blades with a hegel h360 and while there might be more refined amps out there I have plenty of power, something that can’t be said for a lot of the competition. Mine have sat in the same spot since I placed them a few months age and while I suspect I could get deeper bass the overall tonal balance is so good and soundstage with imaging being so, so addicting that it’s really easy to get pulled into the music. There’s been several contenders, a few from kef and so much depends on rooms, placement, components that although I tried a lot of the speakers folk worship around here and others laughed at that I would go against everything I’ve learned first hand calling 1 speaker better than another.

Your money, buy what you like and like my daddy would say “everybody has a motive”.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

On the contrary, I find the Reference series to be far away from the R series. I have not heard the Blades but the R series dont sound anyway as good as the Reference. Heard both in a medium sized (maybe 50 - 60 sqm) heavily treated showroom. Is it worth the price difference in sq alone? Definitely, especially to enthusiasts.

For 10,000 USD+ PERSONALLY i expect a tower which can give 20 hz bass extension... but that's just me.
For that reason i find a better deal a R7/R11 + dual subs + act cross at 80hz.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Reference series is not R series.
They should change series names.

My theory on that one is that how many letters of the word "Reference" are in the speaker name is their indicator of how close it is to being of reference quality. Obviously anything with the full name is of that quality while anything designated "Ref" is not quite there, and anything with just an "R" is only a little bit there, but better than a "Q"

 

[steve59]

Does the Blade 2 has the Meta technology?
Anyways it looks stunning

The blade and reference line address back wave in the speaker design which I think would make the meta redundant