Jukebox
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2020
- Messages
- 194
- Likes
- 359
90% it's plastic I would say
-
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 Reference and Blade Meta announced, but where is the R Meta?????
- Thread starter MarkWinston
- Start date
tecnogadget
Addicted to Fun and Learning
The HTS3001se will be vastly superior to the T301, no doubts about it. Can’t comment over the R8a without having listened to them nor seen measurements. I can only help you stating the 3001se are highly versatile: low footprint, can be stand mounted or wall mounted through the included base, vertically or horizontally, and the port is down-firing hence it doesn’t interfere as much with backwall, and can be sealed with included foam bungs. Great directivity, and very smooth frequency response (but not completely flat).
bo_knows
Addicted to Fun and Learning
How linear surround speaker needs to be for me to hear birds chirping, leaves rustling, winds blowing, crowd murmuring and other special effects in the movies? As you said, HTS3001 is good enough for small spaces.
tecnogadget
Addicted to Fun and Learning
I totally share your point of view on surround speaker demands. This could only be understood by those with enough experience with 5.1/+ setups. Surrounds are meant mostly for “enveloping” effects.How linear surround speaker needs to be for me to hear birds chirping, leaves rustling, winds blowing, crowd murmuring and other special effects in the movies? As you said, HTS3001 is good enough for small spaces.
We all know how a natural voice should sound (we hear speach on a daily basis, and that’s why a center channel should be as accurate as it can be), but the demand for surrounds is very less restrictive since we don’t really know how the sound of aliens spaceship sounds, or the roar of Godzilla/King Kong…
That’s why I find good dispersion and directivity much important than perfect FR for surrounds. And this is where this 3001se does a great job. Of course improving FR smoothness and tonal balance will always improve the surround experience, but it isn’t as a key factor as it is for mains or center channel duty.
I sent some R8a's to erin awhile back.
He did a great job as usual; in fact that's the only comprehensive set of measurements I've seen for Dolby (upfiring) speakers. So, not only is it a bit of a mystery as to what makes a good Dolby speaker in the first place, but how good is the R8a compared to Q-series, Arendal, etc. at a much lower price? We can safely assume diminishing returns, but to what degree given the entire use case is sort of "only if you have no other choice"? We don't really have anything comprehensive to compare against, AFAIK
killdozzer
Major Contributor
@jackocleebrown If you allow for one easier question, I wondered why is there such a huge difference from what is recommended amp power for passive LS50 to what KEF builds in the active version? I realise a certain amount of energy gets lost in the DSP, so to speak, I just didn't expect it to be such a huge difference. Upper limit is 100w recommendation for a passive one, but there's 230w in the active speakers; 200 for the mid/woofer and 30 for the tweeter, so 230 per channel. How significant is the role security plays in all this and what would be your recommendation if you were dealing with someone who is not likely to fry the speakers?
One other thing, in real numbers, how hungry is the dip of 3.9 ohm? If you want to set up the SPL to an average of 96dB and you want to make sure there's enough headroom on the side of the amp, what would be the required amp strength?
One other thing, in real numbers, how hungry is the dip of 3.9 ohm? If you want to set up the SPL to an average of 96dB and you want to make sure there's enough headroom on the side of the amp, what would be the required amp strength?
In an active, each amp has to be able to deliver full power at a given frequency, I suppose. Also, the amps are likely specified much more narrowly to function (Current, etc.).
Arc Acoustics
Member
But significantly cheaper than passive components, it's just a piece of plastic!
The marketing team of KEF is very shrewd, and the customer may be just regular audiophiles, so they will pay the extra grands gladly to the "buzzword".
Above the previous R series, they already have a reasonably flat on-axis response in the tweeter range without META, so the reality is, Meta maybe just good news for x-over designers and the company itself.
No, but clearly the marketing's latched onto it, because it's an interesting piece of tech, and it is the only obviously different thing in the LS50 Meta, rather than all the refinements.
It does a better job, cheaper and more simply (at least simpler to assemble, after you've done the maths and research).
But yes, both the LS50 Meta and particularly the Reference + Blade Meta have many other changes that affect the actual result much more. The MAT is some way down the list.
Although I wonder if there are secondary effects of having it - for example did the space saving from it make the new suspension system in the Reference/Blade feasible without redesigning the cabinets?
steve59
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2019
- Messages
- 1,023
- Likes
- 736
If hearing the blade meta will be anything like finding a pair of blade 1 to demo it won't matter much anyhow. Hifi shows will be the only place most of us will get to hear them and honestly the last axpona event kef was playing the muon speakers with the blade and blade 2 on display and with all the kids, literally children running around an open display it was impossible to generate an opinion of them.
Kef's own video about the meta disc states clearly that the disc's only function is to provide better resonance absorption (99% rate) from the back of the tweeter than traditional speaker foam and reduce the overall cabinet resonance. So the real question is can you measure how well traditional foam absorbs the unwanted resonance? Is the difference from using these two materials measurable? How much is the overall cabinet resonance with and without using the metal material? I think these are valid questions.
Last edited:
Did you see the talk by KEF's Sebastien Degraeve?
You need both foam and resonance absorption in practice, and that had a bunch of comparisons. It's not either/or - the MAT still has some foam in front of it - quoting from the white paper:
And the talk goes into that more.
The MAT is acting as an ideal resonance chamber, as an practical alternative to the theoretically-ideal-but-impractical tapered cone or infinite tube. It's not a replacement for the foam.
steve59
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2019
- Messages
- 1,023
- Likes
- 736
As a totally biased blade 1 owner I've decided the meta tech is just a cost reducing measure so the blade and reference can share the same uniq driver and metamaterial costs less to manufacture than the 3" voice coin with the vented magnet. and that's that. The white paper is word salad for the prices are going up again. lol. While i'm kidding, sorta with all the variables in room acoustics and simple set up, repeatable performance is usually unobtainable, even more regarding passive designs.
BoredErica
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Is Muon still officially their flagship speaker?
It better be because KEF is quoting prices for ordering them.
MUON | KEF
KEF Muon is the result of KEF engineering prowess combining with world-class industrial design by Ross Lovegrove. Only 100 pairs have ever been produced, and feature an individual engraving of serial number and Ross Lovegrove's signature on the back.
us.kef.com
MUON | KEF
A triumph of form marrying function, MUON is perhaps the most extraordinary loudspeaker ever conceived. MUON is the result of KEF engineering prowess combining with world-class industrial design by Ross Lovegrove. The Muon is limited to an edition of 100 pair.
us.kef.com
Today I was at a large retail chain that has a section in the store with the higher-end audio options. I walked in and was surprised to see Blades! Not having seen them in-person before, I assumed they were Blade 2. The label on the back above the binding posts said "Blade Meta"! I asked a salesperson to hear them. I thought they sounded great. I did not make any note of room treatments or source gear.
Two salespeople were there now and it went like this:
Me: "wow, how long have you had these?"
Sales: "probably about 6 months."
Me: "are you sure? I didn't think the Meta versions have been out that long?"
Sales: "yes for sure, we have had them 5-6 months"
Me: "How are they Meta then?"
Sales: "A few guys in KEF shirts showed up about 3 weeks ago and installed new drivers in them"
Two salespeople were there now and it went like this:
Me: "wow, how long have you had these?"
Sales: "probably about 6 months."
Me: "are you sure? I didn't think the Meta versions have been out that long?"
Sales: "yes for sure, we have had them 5-6 months"
Me: "How are they Meta then?"
Sales: "A few guys in KEF shirts showed up about 3 weeks ago and installed new drivers in them"
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,904
- Likes
- 16,933
From price point of view, but not from engineering as the Blade engineering was more advanced, not to talk about the new Blade Meta. The Muon was more a luxurious material design sculpture project for buyers where price is irrelevant.
killdozzer
Major Contributor
That's very far from the truth and not quite fair of an observation. You can find measured difference in distortion provided by KEF so perhaps your dispute should be also grounded in some measurements of your own.