ethanhallbeyer
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 175
- Likes
- 50
I've heard comments online suggesting the R200 and LS50 Meta sound very similar, with perhaps a bit of a superior mid-range, more detail, and better highs on LS50 but better bass on the R200. I also read that the LS50 Meta would be more appropriate as near field monitors and R200 would not be as good for that application. As for soundstage, based on what I've come across, it seems the R200 has a wider soundstage, but LS50 Meta has a deeper one?
Are all of those characterizations pretty spot on?
The R200 are like $565/pr right now, and the LS50 Meta go on sale for about $1300. Wait long enough and you can find places like Crutchfield do $1000/pr with stands, like they did with the LS50 years back.
So it seems like the R200 would be the best bang for the buck out of these two? Would there be anything the LS50 Meta brings to the table over the R200 that can justify double the price?
Also, one reviewer I came across said he prefered R100 over R200, in that the R100 seemed more resolving and revealing (maybe some would define it as thinner sounding). Would you say that going up the line from R100 to R200 to R700, you're just getting "more" of the same, just better?
Lastly, KEF LS50 Meta come with port plugs, for when you want to use subwoofers and not the port. I like the idea because I personally prefer sealed speakers in the sense that I won't get bugs crawling inside of them because they are sealed. With LS50 I can use the plugs and they are effectively sealed, and I also plan to use subs down the road. With R200, the port has something in the middle and I'm not sure you can simply plug it?
Thanks!
Are all of those characterizations pretty spot on?
The R200 are like $565/pr right now, and the LS50 Meta go on sale for about $1300. Wait long enough and you can find places like Crutchfield do $1000/pr with stands, like they did with the LS50 years back.
So it seems like the R200 would be the best bang for the buck out of these two? Would there be anything the LS50 Meta brings to the table over the R200 that can justify double the price?
Also, one reviewer I came across said he prefered R100 over R200, in that the R100 seemed more resolving and revealing (maybe some would define it as thinner sounding). Would you say that going up the line from R100 to R200 to R700, you're just getting "more" of the same, just better?
Lastly, KEF LS50 Meta come with port plugs, for when you want to use subwoofers and not the port. I like the idea because I personally prefer sealed speakers in the sense that I won't get bugs crawling inside of them because they are sealed. With LS50 I can use the plugs and they are effectively sealed, and I also plan to use subs down the road. With R200, the port has something in the middle and I'm not sure you can simply plug it?
Thanks!
