I don’t understand?Nah, you can show the on-axis response separately.
If it was a bad frequency response, It is SO OBVIOUS, you can not hide it.
And if it has truly good directivity, there is absolutely no problem with normalizing, which KEF is not in the case.
You are listening to the direct path at "some-axis", not the average of LW, so unevenness of the on and off-axis response inside the LW is already a bad thing.
View attachment 187680
Well, 1/3 octave smoothing is absolutely SH*T, I agree with you, but where comes the SH*T from at the first place?
Miss-quote maybe?
-
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
Same feel for me, with the directivity and flat FR I don’t see passive floor standers can go any better worth upgrade from this. But then even I get a free pair my tiny home won’t be able to place them, so it’s eye candy
I’m hoping they haven’t gone B&W and jacked up the treble to get that fake feeling of detail openness and resolution that then just give you fatigue and stay true to thier goal of neutral speakers. Hopefully it’s a small adjustment.I hope the same; Although I loved the old Ref series, always found them a bit to dark for my tastes...wanted juuust a bit of extra sparkle!
I’m worrying to much ? . I just get myself an mini DSP then
as you need to eq to your room anyhow and can set a curve as you like .The relative “hotness” of the treble migth as be factors of listening distance and room acoustics to
Jukebox
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2020
- Messages
- 194
- Likes
- 359
For sure they will not be Bowers....only Bowers can be BowersI’m hoping they haven’t gone B&W and jacked up the treble to get that fake feeling of detail openness and resolution that then just give you fatigue and stay true to thier goal of neutral speakers. Hopefully it’s a small adjustment.
I’m worrying to much ? . I just get myself an mini DSP then
The relative “hotness” of the treble migth as be factors of listening distance and room acoustics to
EQ is always a good tool but I generally use it under the room transition frequency.
What about Erin’s measurement s on older kefs? He also confirmed kefs directivity is the best. LMAONah, you can show the on-axis response separately.
If it was a bad frequency response, It is SO OBVIOUS, you can not hide it.
And if it has truly good directivity, there is absolutely no problem with normalizing, which KEF is not in the case.
You are listening to the direct path at "some-axis", not the average of LW, so unevenness of the on and off-axis response inside the LW is already a bad thing.
View attachment 187680
Well, 1/3 octave smoothing is absolutely SH*T, I agree with you, but where comes the SH*T from at the first place?
Miss-quote maybe?
Arc Acoustics
Member
Are you trolling?
What was your 1/3 oct smoothing SH*T came from?
You answer that, then I will answer to you.
[It was not you, I'm very sorry]
Last edited:
The LS50 needs support up to 200Hz or so. To cut it off at the usual 80..100Hz doesn't help much. The spl was limited by that LS50 still. But with a DSP / x-over You don't have to pay kilo dollars. Reasoning: DSP makes sense only if You invest in measuring equipment and some easy to come by personal knowledge. That given, a pair of subs can be chosen properly--many will be happy to go as high as mentioned. With DSP all adjustments are available, e/g frequnecy response, delay, EQ, limiter ... to integrate room / speakers well.
The other way round. If one doesn't want to dig deeper, e/g by investing in self-made measurements and knowledge, the eventual quality remains a matter of speculation, blind trust at best, and so called 'critical', but inconsequential 'listening tests'. Especially the latter would bug me because it distracts from the intended enjoyment with music.
edit: could be an Allison approach; (2) subs left/right against the front wall, facing forward, and the LS50 on stands a bit off the front and sidewall toe'ed in by 45°; with DSP no problem
Last edited:
Sorry you mistook me for someone else. Earlier you got the LMAOfrom someone else not me. LMAO
Arc Acoustics
Member
Oh, I'm very sorry. It was another LMAO guy.
Well, probably because he did not measure Genelecs or Neumanns. (I really hope he measures them!!)
Coaxial design is tricky, something to be a diaphragm is not particularly good as a waveguide.
KEF coped with the gap problem but still is not competitive to the Genelec 83*1, which is way cheaper.
But if we don’t see it in FR, they have managed the tricky part already.
I scanned the other ones.
Looking at KEF Reference 4 (measured by ASR) and KEF Reference 4 Meta:
It shows that KEF do proper measurements above 200 Hz. I am guessing they have a small anechoic room but that they did not invest in a Klippel.
On one side it is good to get at least some data but it is a bit sad that the quality of the measurements is below what you can do at home (see @napilopez guide).
The data quality is not enough to tell if there is differences between the 2 speakers. In any case, that's a great but expensive center.
Looking at KEF Ref Meta 1 v.s 5, they are very close together, I double checked the graphs and the results looks surprising to me.
Looking at KEF Reference 4 (measured by ASR) and KEF Reference 4 Meta:
It shows that KEF do proper measurements above 200 Hz. I am guessing they have a small anechoic room but that they did not invest in a Klippel.
On one side it is good to get at least some data but it is a bit sad that the quality of the measurements is below what you can do at home (see @napilopez guide).
The data quality is not enough to tell if there is differences between the 2 speakers. In any case, that's a great but expensive center.
Looking at KEF Ref Meta 1 v.s 5, they are very close together, I double checked the graphs and the results looks surprising to me.
Last edited:
Your signature.
Arc Acoustics
Member
Well, a 2dB discrepancy of the LW from the on-axis means a relatively large deviation inside the LW.
DI (not LWDI) hitting around 11dB in the top octave suggesting narrowing as well, which they filled by 2dB bump of on-axis response.
Truly good design never need this kind of shoddy trick.
First thing first, what I designed is completely irrelevant to what KEF does.
Second, as I wrote in the notes section of it, the current simulated data has 1/24 resolution, which satisfy the CTA-2034-A (1/20 oct), not bloody 1/3 oct BS.
The previous data I posted (attached below) was the actual measurement of the tweeter and squawker section, which I was not satisfied with.
(Gating causes unavoidable smoothing but not problem in the mid-high freq.)
Oh sh*t! It was almost a year ago!
Last edited:
Oh? I thought you designed a speaker? My bad. Opps.
So you're telling me the measurements in your signature have the resolution of a Klippel NFS? Sure....
Arc Acoustics
Member
Oh you obviously know how NFS measures in the high frequency. LMAO
Do you? Because your arguments are as bad as the resolution of your measurements.
Arc Acoustics
Member
Oh, you can see the difference between heavily smoothed data and smooth raw data. LMAO
Well, there is nothing I can do for you but at least you can learn with your effort, that's how a man cultivates himself.
Stereophonic
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2022
- Messages
- 1
- Likes
- 9
The Frosted Blue Pair are mine. I have my order in for the Blade 1 META hopefully receiving by the end of March
You are comparing your diy design with something like kef which is backed up by real acoustic engineers, who has PHD in what they are doing with real simulations and measurements in controlled rooms ? Lol ! I don’t think none of the other companies have half of the engineering breaks throughs like kef pulled off.Oh, you can see the difference between heavily smoothed data and smooth raw data. LMAO
Well, there is nothing I can do for you but at least you can learn with your effort, that's how a man cultivates himself.