• 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 T301C Review (Ultra-thin Speaker)

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 141 80.6%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 30 17.1%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 2 1.1%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 2 1.1%

  • Total voters
    175

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,425
Likes
7,941
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Thank you for your review Amir, and the measurements. It is very instructive for people who are able to interpret the measurements, their strengths and limitations.

However, I wonder if a better way would be to measure it in its typical use case. If this is a speaker designed for under bench mounting, under a TV, or wall mounting below or above a TV, is it possible to measure and review it as such?

The measurements may be better, or even worse, and sound better or sound worse.

I do agree that this makes it an outlier and cannot be compared to the other measurements which are measured in the far field / 4pi environment, and thus a disadvantage or downside of testing as such.

But if the review is helpful people for making purchase decision for buying a small shallow speaker for use with a TV, is is very helpful in its own right.

I don’t not expect you to change your mind, and I understand reasons for testing using a standard dose protocol, but I feel this testing may somewhat disadvantage this speaker, particularly as the measurement will appear on other websites; and this the context may not be included, like you have thoughtful tone.

I, for one, would like to know how these under or over the TV or on-wall speakers compare to each others, which seems to be in every big box store, and what many general consumers are buying these days.

Please consider.
On-wall installation won’t change much except that the on-axis response will become very similar to that of the sound power.

We don’t know whether that psychoacoustically changes things as no research has been done on that particular use case before.
 

tktran303

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
683
Likes
1,181
On-wall installation won’t change much except that the on-axis response will become very similar to that of the sound power.

We don’t know whether that psychoacoustically changes things as no research has been done on that particular use case before.

I’m not saying we should throw out the baby with the bath water.

I think we should also consider what else the baby will/can do.

that’s why this is an opportunity to expand the science and knowledge base.

Science is changing all the time and when things change, we too, mustchange.

For instance, I think that benchmarking my truck with a 0-60 mph sprint time and the 1/4 mile dash is great, but somewhat incomplete.

Because that’s not what I’ll be doing with it. Perhaps the benchmarking should consider ground clearance, tow capacity, storage capacity, seating capacity, fuel efficiency, range etc. These are all objective measures and can be further studied and elucidated.

In 1970 these vehicles were considered niche. Later (now) trucks are the best selling cars where I’ve lived (Australia and Canada).
I certainly know they’ve been very popular in the USA even before Canada or Australia.

Now I politely withdraw from this discussion.
 
Last edited:

AnalogSteph

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
3,338
Likes
3,278
Location
.de
They are using a flat diaphram speaker.

The KEF uses 4.5” drivers, the 3” Tectonic BMR is the same depth of the KEF enclosure, so it is some pretty notable engineers to get a 4.5” driver this small.
t-woofer.jpg

Instead of a cone, the radical new twin-layer bass and midrange unit has a flat diaphragm whose rigidity throughout the frequency range is maintained by very fine stiffening ribs, with the driver as a whole acting as a stressed member to help eliminate any unwanted resonance from the slim cabinet.
Neat. Might be worth trying to DIY a cabinet (or at least cabinet back) for, as the "help eliminate any unwanted resonance from the slim cabinet" part clearly didn't work out as intended. Or go full speaker designer and do something else, like a mini Focal Twin6Be of sorts.
 

PeteL

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
3,303
Likes
3,838
Looks like this one is doing much better, is even thinner and cheaper.
Shows us that active and DSP can go a long way. Impressive the level of miniaturisation that can be achieved.
 

Mauro

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2019
Messages
92
Likes
81
Looks like this one is doing much better, is even thinner and cheaper.
Shows us that active and DSP can go a long way. Impressive the level of miniaturisation that can be achieved.
Actually KEF T301C is shallower 1,5” vs IKEA’s 2”. Anyway it’s difficult not to agree with you on the rest.

I always expect KEF to deliver best in class sound quality!
 
Last edited:

Ata

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 6, 2021
Messages
388
Likes
333
Location
Adelaide, Australia
I considered these for a brief moment for my HT build earlier this year. Glad I went with real speakers!
 

Paweł L

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2021
Messages
94
Likes
45
For what it is, not bad. But, the midrange cone break ups in the tweeter passband should be filtered at this price and I would expect product from someone like KEF to be something designed with a bit more attention to the details.
 

nc42acc

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
58
Likes
62
Location
North Carolina
I have these as my main and center for a home theater setup. They are worse than what Amir reported. Unbelievably inefficient that you need some big power AV receiver to make them play. I found them on close out online for a great price and wanted something thin and inconspicuous.
 

Paweł L

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2021
Messages
94
Likes
45
I installed a few large TVs and often people get them with Samsung bar with sub. Often I hear complains, "they supposedly be wireless..., I want No visible cables ..."
They're inefficient, but little 's..t' drivers asked to reproduce low mids are this way by design - one can't change the laws of physics. Seriously I can't live with Sound Bars, although they are better than having no dedicated spkrs. If I could, and had the living space, I would put together system with Pro Audio drivers, DSP x-o - efficiency, dynamics, low distortions. Well, I hear complains with 86 dB/2.83V, so I just try to improve what I have - I wish, I could slap the box on the stand and Klippel measure it. With tool like this even qualified DIY person could produce highly competitive loudspeaker.
 

More Dynamics Please

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
562
Likes
752
Location
USA
On wall positioning should increase bass to some degree at least but not enough to recommend these over better options. Though considerably deeper at 5.5" the Revel S16 comes to mind as a well-designed, much better performing on wall speaker for about the same price.
 

nathan

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
361
Likes
252
Wow these results just make me sad. On wall would increase the bass measurably, and that would likely make the top end less pronounced in comparison. But unless wall mounting makes the whole thing more rigid, it's still an uphill battle.
 

radix

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
1,370
Likes
1,307
Wow these results just make me sad. On wall would increase the bass measurably, and that would likely make the top end less pronounced in comparison. But unless wall mounting makes the whole thing more rigid, it's still an uphill battle.

The wall plates are fairly hefty metal about 90% of the overall length with 2 binding pegs. The speakers also seem to magnetically "snap" to the wall plate. I suspect it would help reduce resonance some. I should try a REW measurement when attached to a wall.
 

valerianf

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
691
Likes
442
Location
Los Angeles
I have a Jamo A804 using a similar design.
x472.jpg


It is a 3 way bass reflex speaker using a coaxial (midrange-tweeter).
Enclosure is heavy as made of aluminum.
Each extremity is the aperture for the bass reflex.
I use it as a center speaker placed just below the TV.

Sound is amazing with just a hi frequency siblance that I removed with EQ.

It is sad that Kef is not able to make a successor to the A804 (no more available).
 

H-713

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
379
Likes
666
I can only imagine the conversation that takes place at the meeting between engineering and marketing when they design these center channel speakers.

Marketing: "Our market research shows that a horizontal, symmetrical center channel will sell really well. Make it as compact as you can."

Engineering: "A speaker of that sort will suck for that application."

Marketing: "Countless others have done it and sold many of them."

Engineering: "That doesn't make it any less flawed."

Marketing: "It's where the money is."

*Engineering goes to sulk in their cubicles for a while, then accepts that it will stink no matter what and chooses to follow Homer Simpson's Half-Assed Work Ethic*
 

bobopich

Member
Joined
May 30, 2020
Messages
34
Likes
22
Thank you for testing this KEF T301! I have/had an idea to use a pair or 4x of KEF T101 as "Atmos" height speakers on the ceiling. With these measurements I would not do it.
The next hope is: Harman Kardon SAT-TS60 or Harman Kardon SAT-TS30. Are there any other thin speakers for the ceiling? Revel had a model, but that too is dicontinued.
I am using 4 x T101 as atmos ceiling speakers and for this purpose I think they are great, I am also making correction for the whole spectrum not just lower frequencies.
 

Attachments

  • ED513B0B-68F9-42F3-9C9F-A92F70B9C97E.png
    ED513B0B-68F9-42F3-9C9F-A92F70B9C97E.png
    362.2 KB · Views: 136

FeddyLost

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
752
Likes
542
In my opinion, such (=on-wall) speakers must be measured and evaluated with their intended placement.
Wall gain must make sound more balanced and less bright. Otherwise no design team would accept this model at all.
At least their whitepaper shows us this:
1638688309254.png

Resonances are just result of price constraints and ultra-low depth, as more rigid and inert cabinet would be deeper and much more expensive. I think, cast aluminium frame with good internal damping would sound better, but at what price?
 
Last edited:

F1308

Major Contributor
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
1,053
Likes
905
It is a loudspeaker and can be tested to explore what is being delivered, have fun, but assuming it should provide astounding performance is a way not be followed, in my honest opinion, once you spend $449.99 after reading or having searched for one of the world's thinnest center channel speakers most probably for crystal-clear dialogue, announced by the maker as a satellite speaker designed to compliment todays flat panel TVs, and that can be wall-mounted and is just a part of another two pieces attending left and right channels.

But you already knew...

"A compact speaker like this is a dream as far as usability below a TV on the wall which is the type of imagery company uses to promote it. My measurements and listening tests did NOT follow that as I tested it like any stand alone speaker."
 

Vladimir Filevski

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
550
Likes
713
I expect the beam width to narrow due to "MTM" configuration and it does, but not nearly as much as we have seen in other speakers:
KEF describes the design as: "Two and a half-way closed box", so no wonder it has wider horizontal directivity than conventional 2-way MTM with two midbass drivers in parallel. But single crossover frequency (1.7 kHz) puzzles me - if it is true 2.5-way system, it should has two crossover frequencies: one at 1.7 kHz and one at, say, 500 Hz.
 

H-713

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
379
Likes
666
KEF describes the design as: "Two and a half-way closed box", so no wonder it has wider horizontal directivity than conventional 2-way MTM with two midbass drivers in parallel. But single crossover frequency (1.7 kHz) puzzles me - if it is true 2.5-way system, it should has two crossover frequencies: one at 1.7 kHz and one at, say, 500 Hz.
That could also be marketing misinterpreting what "2.5 way" means.
 
Top Bottom