Upgrade from KEF LS50s

[Chromatischism]

That is true. For a single listening position, it may not matter.

It definitely matters. Smooth bass response always matters

I recommend subs for 80 Hz and down because a lot of testing has shown that to be a good average for localization and overall clean sounding bass. Every single time I have had higher frequencies coming through the sub, sound quality has suffered.

 

[pablolie]

It definitely matters. Smooth bass response always matters

I recommend subs for 80 Hz and down because a lot of testing has shown that to be a good average for localization and overall clean sounding bass. Every single time I have had higher frequencies coming through the sub, sound quality has suffered.

I agree with this. I don't dismiss the fact that those who put some serious work into it (and especially those who integrate 2 subs painstakingly with Dirac... and it's not as straightforward as it sounds) can achieve awesome results (I have heard it at a friend's that went with Elac bookshelves and 2 subs), but heavens, it is a lot of work for marginal results, and I kinda like to rotate some equipment in and out and refresh and recalibrate my enjoyment.

Yes 80Hz is a safe choice. It's kind of funny that Dirac seems to agree with 70-80Hz as ideal in pretty much every setup I have heard about, but the sample rate is about 4 friends.

 

[sweetmusic]

@pablolie and others who are really happy with the LS50 + subwoofer combination... What do you think about this bakeoff:

1. KEF LS50 Wireless ii + KEF KC62 subwoofer, with no room correction beyond the limited settings on those speakers.
2. Buchardt A500 with no sub, with the streamer that has room correction.

I would be listening in a medium sized room, never playing them very loud. Either option meets my goal of small bookshelf speakers, HDMI ARC and streaming. I'm unsure whether the room correction with the Buchardt would really sound better. People seem to really love the KEF.

 

[Chromatischism]

I would bet good money that the A500 will sound quite a bit better than LS50W II + KC62.

 

[sweetmusic]

@Chromatischism do you favor the A500 because of the room correction, because the low frequency is better integrated than a separate sub would be, or for other reasons?

One criticism I've heard of the Buchardt is that there's some background noise from the amps. Quoting from one reviewer, "What starts to annoy after a while is the clearly perceptible noise of the amplifiers when the speakers are on, audible even in soft music passages. In standby it is gone." Johnny Darko observed the same. The KEF does not have this limitation, fwict.

 

[Chromatischism]

@Chromatischism do you favor the A500 because of the room correction, because the low frequency is better integrated than a separate sub would be, or for other reasons?

One criticism I've heard of the Buchardt is that there's some background noise from the amps. Quoting from one reviewer, "What starts to annoy after a while is the clearly perceptible noise of the amplifiers when the speakers are on, audible even in soft music passages. In standby it is gone." Johnny Darko observed the same. The KEF does not have this limitation, fwict.

The measurements are better.

Also, Darko has both and did a comparison.

If you're concerned about amp noise, you could get the S400 MKII and feed them with a good amp.

 

[HooStat]

If you want the KEF, you could get the $99 Thomann DSP unit to EQ the sub (i.e., between the LS50 wireless sub output and the KC62 input. At least, I think it would work. It will be some manual work to figure out the filters (with REW, presumably), but it is a way to get some more fine-grained control via DSP for the KEF system.

An alternative is to get a streamer that does HDMI ARC (assuming one exists) and get either the Neumann KH80 + KH 750 and their DSP system, or the Genelec 8330 + 7350 sub with GLM. For the Neumann and Genelec, it depends on how loud you like it. If you are listening at 75-80 dB like many people, then those options will be loud enough in most rooms and have excellent integration. There are always trade-offs in terms of loudness, bass extension, bass smoothness, quality of room correction, and budget.

 

[Darvis]

I totally agree with this. I am running LS50s in 2.2 stereo (both KEFs have their own subwoofer) with a minidsp DDRC-24. Ive got the crossover set at a fairly high 180hz however localization is not an issue because the KEFs and their respective subs are 19 inches apart cone center to cone center. Dirac Live from 20-500 hz with PEQ above that point. the result is a very satisfying semi active 3 way pseudo floorstander. headroom aplenty, tight articulate bass, low distortion.
Il continue to upgrade this system most likely but for now I haven't found anything close to the KEFs for my preferences let alone for what I paid for them (not even close to MSRP ) Its likely that the next step for this setup is actually replacing the subs (SVS SB-1000s) with a pair of those dual 8 inch Rythmics.

You're way out the "cheap" territory with such a system but I bet you get a world-class SQ for a reasonable price.

 

[thewas]

The measurements are better.

Wouldn't generalise such, for example vertical directivity of the KEF is better.

 

[sweetmusic]

@Chromatischism Thanks for the pointers to the Neumann and Genelec. I know they've been recommended many times on this site, but I never really looked in detail. They definitely have the appearance of pro gear, but if domestic tranquility allows, the measurements are outstanding.

Hmm, I can't seem to find a simple streamer with HDMI ARC in and digital XLR out...

Another idea, from a recent Darko video about using a Samsung TV as a streamer:
- the TV is the music streamer
- connect an HDMI ARC audio extractor
- add an optical-to-XLR converter
- add an XLR splitter to go to the monitors and subs

(Yes, it's a lot of adaptors. I didn't see an HDMI audio extractor that has 2 digital XLR outputs. Maybe one exists?)

Limitations of the TV as streamer:
- All music gets resampled to 48 kHz.
- No gapless playback.
- The TV screen is always on when you're listening to music

This is my whole experience with audio... the pieces all exist, but they don't quite fit together the way that you want, and you're stuck with lots of cords or compromises.

Even the Buchardt requires a separate hub box. It's nice that it's a small one. Otherwise, the Buchardt is magically simple. If the amp hum isn't obvious, it's the most elegant way to get all the features and outstanding measured performance.

The KEF active setup is very simple too. The catch is there's not an easy way to get room correction into the mix without buying a separate, pricey box, possibly with an unnecessary amp in it. If the Buchardt Wisa streamer had digital out, or KEF supported Wisa, that would check all the boxes.

I guess it's still the case that there are more and easier options for passive speakers.

 

[Chromatischism]

Wouldn't generalise such, for example vertical directivity of the KEF is better.

Of course. But they're good enough that I don't think it matters unless you'll find yourself standing up in front of the speakers or laying on the floor, and I don't think you're doing critical listening at either of those times

 

[thewas]

Of course. But they're good enough that I don't think it matters unless you'll find yourself standing up in front of the speakers or laying on the floor, and I don't think you're doing critical listening at either of those times

Guess that depends also on the percentage of direct / reflected sound, so room acoustics and listening distance, anyway my reply was just referring to your statement about measurements, not their psychoacoustic impact.

 

[Pattern]

I would go bigger and lower. Ideally you want to only have to integrate the sub bass because that is what aligns best with the localizability of bass frequencies. If done right, you will have no vocals or other sounds coming from your bass producers, which allows you to perfectly place them in the room for the best response. You don't have that freedom when you have voices and other sounds coming from the subs due to the high crossover.

I have chosen to run them in this way (each sub sits directly behind the stand for its respective KEF) for a few reasons, firstly, with the physical distance between the subs and their paired speaker being so short localization is a non issue because in the low frequencies our ability to localize sound is still rough enough that they at least to my ear are perceived as a single source. This allows me to run the crossover higher specifically to eliminate high excursion movement in the woofer cone, now I haven't measured this but theoretically this would help eliminate intermodulation distortion from the tweeter caused by movement of the "wave guide". Theoretical effects aside what I can absolutely report affirmatively is an increase in maximum SPL before any obviously audible signs of stress. this configuration along with a wide listening window Dirac calibration has provided nice even bass across every seating position in my room and even came out with some surprisingly flat measurements in some areas outside of the window as well. secondly this setup shrinks the overall footprint of my setup which is unfortunately a bit of a constraint for me.

I definitely recognize the benefits one can gain from keeping the crossover low and optimally positioning subs for bass performance, but for my room and my goals this configuration performs fabulously, And I could not have done it without a DDRC-24, best audio money I have spent period.

Of course. But they're good enough that I don't think it matters unless you'll find yourself standing up in front of the speakers or laying on the floor

Incidentally, This is exactly why I have such a hard time justifying moving on from KEF/Coaxials, I spend a significant amount of time doing both.

 

[Pattern]

You're way out the "cheap" territory with such a system but I bet you get a world-class SQ for a reasonable price.

Its been a slow process rolling up this snowball of equipment and much of it is used. To give a rough estimate I have probably ~$3500 wrapped up in it, I haven't heard enough world class stereos to make a confident comparison but I can definitely say that I do believe this configuration punches well above its weight and works like a charm in my room.

 

[Pattern]

@pablolie and others who are really happy with the LS50 + subwoofer combination... What do you think about this bakeoff:

1. KEF LS50 Wireless ii + KEF KC62 subwoofer, with no room correction beyond the limited settings on those speakers.
2. Buchardt A500 with no sub, with the streamer that has room correction.

I would be listening in a medium sized room, never playing them very loud. Either option meets my goal of small bookshelf speakers, HDMI ARC and streaming. I'm unsure whether the room correction with the Buchardt would really sound better. People seem to really love the KEF.

I would not consider running subs without any kind of room correction personally, save for near field setups where you only need to dial it in for a single specific position such as your desk chair.

 

[pablolie]

I would not consider running subs without any kind of room correction personally, save for near field setups where you only need to dial it in for a single specific position such as your desk chair.

I do agree - however I'd also point out it's easier to optimize low bass with a sub for room response, there are several guides for it. I positioned and set up the sub based on Dirac input, but did not do advanced EQ. If a speaker has full extension, positioning is more complicated, imo.

 

[Pattern]

I do agree - however I'd also point out it's easier to optimize low bass with a sub for room response, there are several guides for it. I positioned and set up the sub based on Dirac input, but did not do advanced EQ. If a speaker has full extension, positioning is more complicated, imo.

Even a DIY solution with a calibrated mic and REW would be sufficient, but without that at minimum the best you can achieve by ear is "sounds good to me" and then begins the endless tweaking until you lose your mind hahaha.

 

[Chromatischism]

have chosen to run them in this way (each sub sits directly behind the stand for its respective KEF) for a few reasons, firstly, with the physical distance between the subs and their paired speaker being so short localization is a non issue because in the low frequencies our ability to localize sound is still rough enough that they at least to my ear are perceived as a single source. This allows me to run the crossover higher specifically to eliminate high excursion movement in the woofer cone, now I haven't measured this but theoretically this would help eliminate intermodulation distortion from the tweeter caused by movement of the "wave guide". Theoretical effects aside what I can absolutely report affirmatively is an increase in maximum SPL before any obviously audible signs of stress. this configuration along with a wide listening window Dirac calibration has provided nice even bass across every seating position in my room and even came out with some surprisingly flat measurements in some areas outside of the window as well. secondly this setup shrinks the overall footprint of my setup which is unfortunately a bit of a constraint for me.

I definitely recognize the benefits one can gain from keeping the crossover low and optimally positioning subs for bass performance, but for my room and my goals this configuration performs fabulously, And I could not have done it without a DDRC-24, best audio money I have spent period.

This is all correct, I'm just saying ideally you'd add another crossover to another pair of subs below 80 Hz so you could get that placement freedom and extension. Can the DDRC-24 do that? I haven't seen anyone do it but with the right MiniDSP unit it should be possible.

 

[Pattern]

This is all correct, I'm just saying ideally you'd add another crossover to another pair of subs below 80 Hz so you could get that placement freedom and extension. Can the DDRC-24 do that? I haven't seen anyone do it but with the right MiniDSP unit it should be possible.

If you ran the two sets of subs in summed mono (upper bass pair both getting signal from channel 3 and lower range both getting signal from channel 4) I believe it should be possible, that's an interesting idea, especially if one used Rythmik FM-8s for the upper bass, as they are intended for this kind of thing, but it would potentially play some havoc with Dirac via the DDRC which can only perform two channel calibrations. I got around this limitation by integrating the subs via REW and then showing dirac the left and right sub-speaker pairs as single channels, effectively dirac 'believed' it was calibrating two full range speakers.