• 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!

Reference Meta updated!

Galliardist

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
2,558
Likes
3,273
Location
Sydney. NSW, Australia

Matias

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
5,029
Likes
10,798
Location
São Paulo, Brazil

Matias

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
5,029
Likes
10,798
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
OP
GNK

GNK

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2022
Messages
47
Likes
78
Location
Great Britain
1.png


It's GOOD that they didn't deleted its previous colour options but added new ones.
Now we have 5 different color options - can't wait to see and pick one of those soon.

price also revealed :
  • Blade One Meta: £30,000
  • Blade Two Meta: £22,500
  • Reference 5 Meta: £17,500
  • Reference 3 Meta: £11,500
  • Reference 1 Meta: £7,500
  • Reference 4 Meta: £6,500
  • Reference 2 Meta: £4,750
  • S-RF1 Floor Stand: £1,000
  • REF 8b Subwoofer: £6,000
 

bo_knows

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
798
Likes
788
Location
Dallas, Texas USA
Now official, along with the Blades.


In the USA, the price went up by $1000 which is acceptable given the improvements.
 
Last edited:

Coraje

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2021
Messages
5
Likes
1
There's like a 99% chance there will be a Meta R3, but it's entirely possible Kef will wait a couple years to do it, as they won't want to steal the thunder of a Reference refresh. The LS50 doesn't really compete with the Reference series, but the R-series does.
Honestly, I don't agree. Many people (including me) have A/B tested many times the LS50 Meta against the R3 and in the end bought the LS50. I really wanted to like the R3 and I thought they had to be "better". All possible placebos and the hype-train were in their favour (they are more expensive, bigger, 3-way vs 2-way, etc etc). I tried them in several different places with several different amps. Usually when I try different speakers I'm unsure which one I prefer but in this case the difference was clear to me, I was just unwilling to accept my thoughts at first. The Metas sound way more clear, and in comparison the R3 is almost muffled. Also, the R3 is dull and a bit unengaging. You can ever hear this in youtube comparisons:
I don't speak german but you can set the subtitles to autotranslate to english (though it isn't a perfect translation, obviously). Listening to demos on youtube isn't ideal, but it can be useful to hear the difference between different speakers. To me the R3 sound dull and veiled, and I had a similar experience when I compared them against the Metas in person. The reviewers on that video also share this opinion (though they still claim they are great speakers etc)
The most popular review on amazon is also in the same line https://www.amazon.com/KEF-Standmound-Speakers-Gloss-Black/dp/B07MM5ZRFJ?th=1

I just write this so that people don't buy them blindly. I know some people on this forum tend to *only* look at graphs, but even Emir recently stated that, for speakers, measurements only represent 70%-80% of the "truth". In my experience, most people that say the R3 are better, just think they "have to be" better because they are 3-way and bigger (that happened to me too). Trying to convince myself into buying them, I played the bass-heavy song "Teardrop" by Massive Attack and they didn't even deliver the bass I was expecting. So, even if it was true that they have better bass, it doesn't matter because you'll need a sub with both the Metas and the R3 to take care of those low frequencies anyways.
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
2,923
Likes
7,616
Location
Canada
I tried them in several different places with several different amps.

Yea but did you EQ? My problem with most people's subjective reports is they never measure and do EQ and if you don't do those things honestly I don't really trust that your system is performing properly. Room EQ is 100% mandatory to good bass and if you don't have it it can really really mess up your perception of a speaker.

Even Amir's perception of the R3 was damaged because he didn't EQ his bass, lol.

Honestly, I don't agree. Many people (including me) have A/B tested many times the LS50 Meta against the R3 and in the end bought the LS50.

I think you misunderstood my post tbh. People talk about the LS50 like it's a speaker you can just use for anything. But you can't. It's really limited. I've heard it, and it distorts like crazy if you push it even a bit. It likely has IMD problems as well as a result of being a coaxial 2-way.

I said the LS50 wasn't competition for the Reference series because not many people who are considering the floorstanders will be happy with a 5" woofer no matter what other things the speaker does well. Even the R3 has a lot more output capability and will work in many rooms where the LS50 simply doesn't.

So, even if it was true that they have better bass, it doesn't matter because you'll need a sub with both the Metas and the R3 to take care of those low frequencies anyways.

Subs don't make the LS50 comparable to a larger woofer because it has problems up to like 200hz, so unless you are willing to do the one sub per speaker thing and mess around with really high crossovers, it's still going to fall apart above 100hz really quickly.
 
Last edited:

Ilkless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Messages
1,757
Likes
3,437
Location
Singapore
For a brand like KEF, having square edges on the Reference seems to be leaving performance on the table. Especially considering previous References like the Reference 20x/2 series had diffraction mitigation measures like the alumnium pods for the Uni-Q. Seems like the intention is for people to move up to Blade for minimal diffraction now.
 

Ataraxia

Active Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2019
Messages
136
Likes
76
For a brand like KEF, having square edges on the Reference seems to be leaving performance on the table. Especially considering previous References like the Reference 20x/2 series had diffraction mitigation measures like the alumnium pods for the Uni-Q. Seems like the intention is for people to move up to Blade for minimal diffraction now.

That and they have to differentiate the speakers. Squared Reference and curved Blade seem to do that for function and aesthetics. Plus at that level they are splitting hairs, going for small percentages, to improve the audio experience. I think that's mentioned in the video.
 

BoredErica

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
629
Likes
899
Location
USA
I'd rather buy a Reference than a Blade based on aesthetics. Can I hear an improvement Blade can offer that even Reference cannot?

... Maybe?

But I sure am going to notice the visual difference. ;) I think they've already done a good job with diffraction and overall SQ with R3/Reference.
 
Top Bottom