If you are considering purchasing this speaker please consider doing so through my affiliate link below as it helps me gain a small commission at no additional cost to you. This is how I can afford to keep purchasing new gear for testing and pay for overhead. It isn't much but it helps. Thank you. Kef R3: amzn.to/3qT4mcU SVS SB-2000 Pro: amzn.to/3eCX8ah SVS SB-3000: amzn.to/3bKv96E
Thank you for the review and especially in breaking it up- into sections you and Amir rule! Please let him know how you do that! Could you please review the KEF LS50 Meta.
Nice review and thanks for the detailed measurements. I have a pair of these and also the LS50. I find them generally excellent but somewhat sibilant and 'breathy' when used on axis. The elevated rweeter level response on-axis might be mild in terms of amplitide but it's also broad, so it also pushes forwasrd 'tsh' and 'shush' sounds. Best used a little off axis which fixes the problem to some degree. Interesting to see a recent video with Andrew Joines of Elac where he strongly advises not to listen to concentric drivers on-axis, but a little of, say 15-20 deg which smoothes the upper end response. Interestingly the LS50 (not the Meta) doesn't have the sibilance issue, but then it shows a light upper mid rise and then slightly dipped tweeter output, i.e. the opposite of the R3. Better balanced to my ears. Some describe that as alittle dark but to me it sounds like an actual person standing in front of me and speaking. I'd like to see the R3 crossover schematic. My hunch is that slightly reducing the resistive padding on the mid driver and raising it on the tweeter by about 1dB (so 2dB relative) would sort this. Oh and I like the shirt :)
I have the R3 for a year now and the sibilance issue is getting worse for some reason... The strangest thing is that the issue is not always there... When I first noticed something was not right, I tried different room, DAC, amp and cable to prove it was on the R3 not something else. It was so bad even my wife said "are they broken""they don't sound like this before"... when I move back to the original position and reconnected them, the issue went away... I have contacted KEF and they said this could be caused by 'loose parts' and told me to check the shadow flare first. I noticed the shadow flare on the left speaker was not seated properly (bottom half) and I cannot push it in fully. I also suspect there is something else 'loose' but due to lockdown I cannot visit local KEF support.
The problem with R series is that the SPL drop off in 30+ degrees starts from midrange, while many competitors show drop mostly for high freq, I think this explains rather congested and lifeless vocals in KEF speakers.
Great video. I've had my R3's set up for about 6 months now. It 100% blew my mind when you talked about sound stage! I tried Monitor Audio 300 Silver just before these and those had tremendously more sound stage width than the Kef! I almost wish I'd kept them. But I really appreciate your comments about depth as well, because I've noticed that on a handful of recordings.
Before Kef R3 I tested Monitor Audio Gold 100 and they have deeper and wider sound stage, even unatural for me. Mid tones dosesn't exist in this speakers. They are classic V shape sound. The main problem was a lot of power to drive. In low volume leves sounds like shit.
I would love to see some hi end speakers measured, but I am sure that is restricted by availability to you, but thanks for your dedication to helping music lovers enjoy their music.
Well, I have measured the Revel F226Be and the Dutch & Dutch 8c. I’d consider those high end. But I’m assuming you’re talking about more esoteric speakers?
I have the Kef R3 in my living room, you are right the Kef's don't have a really wide sound stage. Plenty of depth, limited width. I have a pair of Totem Signatures downstairs in the family room. The Totems had a much wider sound stage. The Kef's are powered by a Cambridge Audio CXA81 sounds great! The Totems are powered by a Denon PMA-1600ne. Both systems sound great. I love listening to live recordings. Jessica Williams Live at Yoshi's comes to mind. Keith Jerret Klon Concerts. Don't get me wrong I like listening to Tool "Chocolate Chip Trip" and Steely Dan "Aja". The Totems are more home theater. The Kef R3s are excellent speakers, great for low volume listening, and really full spectrum. For me the Totem's sound better. More alive and a little faster. No need for a sub with either of these speakers. Liked your review, everyone's listening room is different, as are people's tastes. But you can't go wrong with the KEFs. The KEF's are on sale right now.
My R3s sound stage width and depth vary greatly depending on both preamp and amplifiers. The most holographic is with tubes. No real surprise here. They are very transparent.
If you're talking about my "globe" polars, those are mine. I generate those using the Klippel output data but with my own MATLAB code. They're unique to my site. 😀
fantastic review. unbiased, objective and carefully thought out. it looks like these speaker were carrfully designed to work with more common room environments and diffuse the sound around evenly to get that sound stage and imaging. im guessing very few people would have serious home theater setups with padded walls where sound waves are mostly absorbed instead of being reflected back.
What a wonderful video..!!! I didn't understood half of it, but the parts that I did definitely where clearer than other analisis and reviews in the past that have tried to expleain some concepts to me. Thank you. (hopefully you 'll be more detailed on interpreting what the graphs mean to us in the real world)
Just to be clear, I am a real believer in level-matched, double-blind ABX testing, but all audiophools do is do "AB testing" with no switching or any kind of controlled environment.
You mention that bass distortion will go away if you have a subwoofer because you will hi-pass the speaker. Many do not hi-pass even with a sub due to complexity of hi-pass options adding more electronic "layers" between source and transducer. What method of hi-pass do you recommend as being the most transparent? 1) Using a pre/int with integrated bass management (not that common), 2) Using a sub with hi-pass out (RCA/XLR) back to amp/int, 3) Convert all analogue to Digital and in the digital domain separate out signals, 4) Other? Thanks
I recommend the Q350 for a lot of my friends who want an entry into the hobby. Relating to what you said about room interaction, it's hard to get people to consider room effects and treatment. So, to improve the chance of success, I go for things like the KEF and other sorts of designs that help control directivity and make placement and room quality less of an issue. In fact, I was thinking with the off-axis performance of these, they might sound best not even toed in. Many, many people don't toe their speakers because they prefer the look of a squared placement.
Just found your channel. Interesting review. I have the original LS50’s driven by a Parasound 2125 v.2, with a McIntosh C39 preamp. I have them about 3 feet from the wall, 6 feet apart. The listening position is about 7 feet. I have them on 24 inch stands, with NO toe-in. I seem to have found the best placement for my room and my taste. The treble, which on axis, could get a bit bright depending on recording, is markedly better with no toe in. Incredible depth of soundstage with orchestral music. Acoustic music and jazz sound amazing!
Quality review m8. Intresting about room interaction with these. Makes me wonder about many youtube reveiwers rooms. They have treatments that just sit where they were put. But every speaker is different and requires different or no treatment. Food for thought.
So true. That’s why I use both rooms but I find more often than not that the living room without treatment is better for well-designed speakers where the off-axis response follows the on-axis response.
I’d like to be able to do that. If people reach out to manufacturers with requests on my behalf they may be more inclined to send me things to test. Maybe contact Kef and ask them. Never know. :)
That's an interesting response at bass frequencies, with that shallow rolloff from 100 Hz down to 40 (?) Hz. I ended up with something similar in my last DIY build, quite by accident too (the PR's resonance frequency ended up being lower than I expected). I liked how it sounded so I didn't bother to fix it. I'm guessing "room gain" flattens it out a little.
I agree. I've not yet seen a response that does that, either. Someone gave a reason for it but I honestly don't recall what their rationale was. I'll need to go back when I get some time to read it.
I really enjoyed this video. I own the KEF R300s and I enjoy the sound that comes from this speakers.listening to Fleetwood Mac.wayman TisDale, Foreigner, sly stone, George Duke as well.i think it’s just a good speaker my opinion that’s all
Can't wait to see you thoughts on these.🤘 For the recall, I didn't like them in my room, whatever these were the best measuring passive speakers I owned. Let's see the correlation between my impressions, yours and datas. Edit: Great job as always. We are mostly on the same line, especially about soundstage and bass extension. Your In-room predicted response (as Amir's) is very close to what I got with my in-room captures.
@@vintageflanker7096 OK. Thanks. Why not floorstander? You have enough square. And can you describe why do you not like R3? I heard them alive. Good but not much enough. And it is correlating with youtube listening. I describe them too soft and lack of some bass in prepared room.
@@streamnoremorse I test about 10 speakers/year in my room. That includes, of course, floorstanders. A500 goes (way) deeper than ANY floorstanding speaker I can afford. You can check the R3 theard on ASR for my detailed impressions. Cheers.😉
I'd really like to see these compared to the Buchardt S400 MKII's. I was just about to pull the trigger on the Buchardt's but maybe I'm overlooking this speaker. How I miss the ability to audition.
I was struggling for a while with these speakers to get it where I wanted, there was a frequency that was sharp that was bothering me. Quad Artera Pre with Audiolab 8300 was good match for me. Another setup I found was going XLR from RME ADI-2 directly to a Yamaha P2500S, this tamed the brightness even further and the even more powerful amp seemed to provide more grunt and control of the bass. However there might be a cost in microdynamics with the pro audio amp unfortunately i havent A/B them in the same room yet. I know its not a hifi amp but if your on a budget and want the power. The new version of that should be the Yamaha XP2500. I also tried the R3s with a class D amp, the XTZ EDGE A2-300 and I didnt like the combination. Id take the Audiolab or the Yamaha any day. The Yamaha was a nice surprise to me and I could live with that. I ended up running biwire cables because I believe I heard a difference with that with the biwire setting. I believe these speakers will scale to some really pricey electronics unavailable to me but they definately want their power. These speakers are not a good match for typical 50-80w integrated amps, ive tried multiple hegel, rega etc, and the results are always lacking and the speakers dont come to life and show what they can really do.
any thoughts on getting the quad artera stereo (power amp)? I heard it's sterile and I'm also looking for warmth - I'm currently deciding between rotel rb 1582 mkii, marantz mm7025, and quad artera stereo... For my source I have a Denafrips Ares 2 and a Schiit lyr 3 with a tube, but I want to make it a bit more family friendly with having a remote with volume control so a warm power amp would be better.
@@18yearsoldnot I deliberately avoided testing the artera power amp because its not really gettting any press nor reviews. If your looking for warmth maybe try parasound?
Was wondering if you preferred these to the Elac UBR62's since those have a wide sound stage and these not so much? Was wondering how they compare with bass and stuff to the Kef R3. Love your videos! thanks.
I liked this review a lot. Good information and level description. Your mysterious dip is related to cone diameter. Most likely a reflection from the midrange cone. It shows up in all the data.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Basically the safest rule of thumb to either blow up or confirm a suspicion about frequency is to calculate full wavelength at the offending frequency if it is repeatable. But I have been troubled by a 1/2 wavelength reflection and even 1/4 wavelength in different scenarios. Deeper cone or horn.
How do you know, which speakers I‘m interested in? It‘ s fun to walk the whole thing through, not too long. Btw, I didn’t found any KEF offer for stands on their website. Are they included ? Does „Little Village“ count as boy group?
I could really live it, I mean, really like what I see..., just the little extra above 3k is too much for me, since I like slightly laid back rather than forward. Maybe slapping some resistor here or there in x-o ;) but, then it depends on tweeter/mid off-axis patern. The Kefs midrange cone reminds me of SBA Alu, Ceramic cones. I remember seeing in measurements the concentric tweeter's ultrasonic break-up resonance is in 30kHz range - quite an achievement for no Be dome.
I ordered my set today and im curretly using the Kef q350's (after selling my Vandersteens Quatros and im looking for a great bookshelf) so im expecting a huge improvement from the Q350s. Im also using an Svs 4000 sub with Simaudio 400m monoblocks, all Audio Research equipment ,Aurrender Streamer and Vpi Classic turntable, Im expecting big things (not unrealistic things) and I hope that these R3s deliver or on to B&W or Sonus Faber. Your logic Erin is sound, use measurements as a guide.
@@rpkett yes they have. I get all of the bass, that I want with any genre of music with the sub and the ability to control it and the eq curve thru Bluetooth from my phone and the speakers themselves are great with excellent mid range and treble. I have added blue tack to the speakers/stands and put sand in the stands for rigidity.
@@hyunjoonkim The R3s definitely have more bass than the Q350s. Overall I would give the edge to the R3s, because I liked the bass and midrange more. Also the R3s are a heavier speaker than the Q350s and better constructed. I have also owned the LS50s as well, but didn't care for them because there was just too much treble, but with the right music, they could be very revealing, but the R3s were a better fit. I have since moved on from both Kef models and now have the Martin Logan 60xti and the B&W 705s2. I love trying new speakers. Good luck in your search. My final pair are yet to be determined.
All right man! You made me download The Cars - Heartbeat City, I've even made a playlist full of 80's on JRiver calling it 'Erin's Playlist', BUT you're not going to turn me into boybands now!!! Hahaha, love you man! What a great design of a speaker! Is it so difficult for EVERY speaker brand to do?
i do undersatnd it was a high investment in the gear, but i do wonder if you'll be only measuring new stuff or maybe some older/used, too (as in maybe do some myth busting)?
I tested the Bose 901 Series IV. Before I even had the NFS. 🙂 As far as I’m aware, I am the only person to provide anechoic data on that speaker. And I’d say it’s a “myth busting” review. 😉 ua-cam.com/video/SRmJo3y5JQI/v-deo.html
Hey Erin, after exhaustive research, I very much want to buy the LS50 metas for HT. [queue drum roll] I have 80% HT / 20% music usage. For Hifi in the "budget", I am comfortable to move forward with LS50M. For HT, wondering if I will be better served with R3 & R2C? My gut says LCR LS50M (I have a sub) is the right choice for my specific needs. I want speakers that are very precise, clear at LOW volume levels (when kid's sleeping) and have wide sound stage for large 12 FT U-sectional that is 10 FT from speakers (narrow room). With the woofer, obviously there are marginal gains in sound dispersion but I am so tempted by LS50M. Have you heard the LS50 (META)? And, if not, based on your experience w/ the LS50WII, which way would you lean, LS50M or R3/R2C? PS love the channel.
Great analysis, really enjoying your work, thanks 🙏 have you ever experienced or tested any of the Ged Lee speakers ? They have a narrow controlled dispersion and should be setup heavily toed in so your sitting off axis from both speakers. From his analysis and measurements this provides a wider sound stage in a stereo setup. PS there is Electronic music with a big sound stage 😎
@Ian Telling Yes, some Electronic music is mixed to have a "Soundstage"....placing instruments and/or vocals in the soundstage when mixing to exhibit, width, depth, height, and specific placement, etc. Check out *DJ Smilk's - The Last Rainforest & Acoustic Crumpet* But, I believe what Erin is referring to is the Natural Room Ambiance...the capture and reproduction of 3D Holographic Space. i.e. what a simple two-microphone stereo recording can capture at a Live performance...the 3D "space" around each instrument and/or vocal, its natural placement in the soundstage, and hearing the "space" of the actual room or venue it was recorded in. Reverb, delay, and phase-manipulating hardware or software plugins that are used during mixing can mimic this (I've used the Bricasti M7 for this). But can't realistically reproduce the TRUE 3D holographic space of live instruments & vocals recorded at the same time at a particular venue via a Blumlein or ORTF stereo microphone setup, or a Binaural recording with the Neumann KU-100 or similar binaural "head" microphone, etc. Check out *The Cowboy Junkies -The Trinity Session* or *Trinity Revisited* or the *Cantate Domino* performance from Reference Recordings, or any of the recordings from *Mappleshade Records*
@@bbfoto7248 I agree that it's hard to create what you refer to as the Sound Stage with just effects etc but I was thinking about the sound stage being the mix of the record in general and the sense of space a recording gives you and how that translates in listening with different types of speakers. I mentioned the Ged Lee speakers as a reference because they have a narrow dispersion but set up correctly will give the image of a wider 'sound stage' at various listening points in a room, which I think is different to what Erin has pointed out with speakers having a wider directivity giving you a greater 'Sound stage' effect. PS thanks for the recommendations of what to listen to :)
I was excited learning about the Spinorama measurements of this channel and Amir’s. I think the only thing that limits the utility of these reviews is the bottom line: most audiophiles want to know if there’s a tangible net gain if they were to trade “up”. Stereophile might be total BS, bit they do have it right in that we want compeers to be grouped together into classes of “similarly good”, and the dreck to be flagged as such. Is that possible in your future reviews?
I guess I don't really know what you want me to say? I do talk about the positive and negative attributes of the speaker with respect to both what I heard and how it measures. I can't talk about "trade up" because 1) I don't know what people are using and 2) It is hard for me to build a mental database of comparisons as I don't have decades' worth of test specimen at my disposal (not that I trust anyone's audible memory to that extent). It is going to take me time to build up that kind of library of data. Until then, direct comparisons will be limited. But when I can, I will.
@@ErinsAudioCorner I guess I'm looking for an anchor. I'd like to know what audio defects are in the reviewed samples compared to a well known neutral reference that excels at the measurement tests. I don't hear defects in speakers I used to own until I listened to a better one side by side in an A/B shootout. I believe Daniel Kumin compared every speaker he's come across against his Energy Veritas 2.8's for almost 30 years, for example. He doesn't assign his highest rating unless something is at least its equal. You can pick your own, but make it your anchor or reference point for every review forward. And anyway, it's a tax write-off. ;)
@@status101-danielho6 I think it would make most sense to choose a reference that is easily accessible to everyone, then. As opposed to a SOTA speaker. Because people can then acquire said anchor and understand the lingo when comparisons are made. That said, while I haven’t tested many speakers myself, I do have a lot of experience listening to various systems of all types. This helps me to understand what I’m hearing and express things I like or do not like as a whole, rather than compared against a singular example.
@@status101-danielho6 (Not OP) That approach helps understand differences in some ways, but it also encourages thinking along the lines of a single axis of performance. All speakers are compromised to some degree. As in this review, the higher directivity may be better for some applications than a broader directivity of other speakers. How would one say that a speaker is "better" then? Another example would be so-called "full range" performance, generally uncommon in bookshelf speakers. Do we demerit almost all bookshelf speakers because they can't produce bass the way a tower with 15" drivers can? Anyway, there's some utility to it, to help the listener if they have also heard those same speakers. In your example, I've never heard the Energy Veritas 2.8, so it's useless to me. Hard to judge the universality of the comparison. IMO - and this is just spitballing - it's probably easiest to make a comparison to some affordable headphone that's quality and common, like the HD600. But in some ways that's also crazy talk, as headphones and speakers are quite far apart.
@@vinnytube1001 Maybe this discussion belongs in a forum rather than a YT comment. To me, it boils down to what the utility of a speaker review is to the audience. Entertainment, earning an income, providing information, etc are all valid reasons. My particular search is for a an inexpensive bookshelf speaker where I can connect to a subwoofer and know that I'm 95% of the way there to the best on the market, without putting up with obvious colorations at moderate volumes. I know for others, high SPL, aesthetics, proximity to boundaries and status matter. The measurements are nice, but I'm more interested in each speaker's relative shortcomings.
Hey dude, enjoy your reviews. I have been following you since DIYMA. I'm new to home audio and would like to see your thoughts/ reviews on preamp/integrated amplifier and DAC's for a stereo setup. Thanks for all you do! P.S. I purchased the Elac 10inch after watching your review. It sounds amazing with my UB52 2.0's.
What’s up, fellow DIYMA’r! I don’t really test electronics because the cost for testing hardware is so high. Plus, I just don’t think that it’s a critical aspect and I feel like it’s kind of a waste of my time. But with that said, I do like to review those kind of things from the perspective of day-to-day use. I’m currently reviewing the Parasound 200 integrated amplifier and am really quite fond of it.
@@ErinsAudioCorner dude, I was actually considering that integrated app. I would love to see a video on that from you. Especially if you measure. I want to upgrade from SMSL SA300.
great detailed review. thanks!! sharp at 2kHz indeed. same with all five kef models i have owned - all the way up to the Blade. to my ears the r3 sounds the least sharp of them all. wonder if it is the reason for the sibilance associated with kef (which is the only thing I can fault these speakers for).
I've yet to hear the Blade. One day, hopefully. After I posted this review I noticed a few others echoing my sentiments so while I hate to see an "issue", I am glad to see I am not the only one and that my information is reliable. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
@@ErinsAudioCorner imo the Blade and Blade 2 are the real deal with Kef. the cabinet design puts them all together in a different league than even the Reference series which use the same drivers as the B2. nearly perfect to my ears in every respect except for that annoying tendency for sibilance in certain recordings. it wasn't there back when I could not afford very good electronics but showed up and has gotten worse as i pare then with ever more resolving, higher end gear. apparently the Meta material goes a long way to solve the same problem in the LS50, maybe it well trickle up to the Blade someday. i have thought of replacing my Blade but I am afraid that i will end up missing the 99% that they do so well. will try with toe out as suggested. often there are really simple solutions to intractable problems. once again, thanks for the extremely informative, well produced videos on your channel!!!
@@Dobbs65 thank you for your thoughtful and actionable advice!!! they are set with considerable toe out since it was first suggested. it does help with sibilance. hf bump still there... thanks again for your advice - really appreciated!
Did anyone compare with some old hi-end classic monitor? For example, JMlab mini utopia? I'm wondering if there is any progress in speakers' technology over 20years. Any thoughts?
I do for drive units. For speakers it is different because I need to be out of the room and in the farfield. Otherwise you don’t get proper summing and you get issues with reflections and room modes.
The equipment what I used was DEQX Premate with Earthwork M23 from the outside field. There was a big drop from about 1000 to 3000hz . Therefore I really don’t know how you can have that kind curve.
@@tomchou99 well, you need to reevaluate your measurement process because something is wrong. Many others have measured the R3 and what your describing doesn’t match.
I don’t want argue with you. The production product got be different with what you tested. My R3 bought was brand new about 8 month ago and it should completely break in already. You probably need asking KEF what happened?
If you are considering purchasing this speaker please consider doing so through my affiliate link below as it helps me gain a small commission at no additional cost to you. This is how I can afford to keep purchasing new gear for testing and pay for overhead. It isn't much but it helps. Thank you.
Kef R3: amzn.to/3qT4mcU
SVS SB-2000 Pro: amzn.to/3eCX8ah
SVS SB-3000: amzn.to/3bKv96E
Perfectly time-aligned coaxial design. NSync t-shirt. That is some meta-alignment there...
😂😂😂
Thank you for the review and especially in breaking it up- into sections you and Amir rule!
Please let him know how you do that! Could you please review the KEF LS50 Meta.
I actually find Erin's reviews easier to digest and understand than Amir's, and that's quite an achievement.)
Nice review and thanks for the detailed measurements.
I have a pair of these and also the LS50. I find them generally excellent but somewhat sibilant and 'breathy' when used on axis. The elevated rweeter level response on-axis might be mild in terms of amplitide but it's also broad, so it also pushes forwasrd 'tsh' and 'shush' sounds. Best used a little off axis which fixes the problem to some degree.
Interesting to see a recent video with Andrew Joines of Elac where he strongly advises not to listen to concentric drivers on-axis, but a little of, say 15-20 deg which smoothes the upper end response.
Interestingly the LS50 (not the Meta) doesn't have the sibilance issue, but then it shows a light upper mid rise and then slightly dipped tweeter output, i.e. the opposite of the R3. Better balanced to my ears. Some describe that as alittle dark but to me it sounds like an actual person standing in front of me and speaking.
I'd like to see the R3 crossover schematic. My hunch is that slightly reducing the resistive padding on the mid driver and raising it on the tweeter by about 1dB (so 2dB relative) would sort this.
Oh and I like the shirt :)
I have the R3 for a year now and the sibilance issue is getting worse for some reason...
The strangest thing is that the issue is not always there...
When I first noticed something was not right, I tried different room, DAC, amp and cable to prove it was on the R3 not something else. It was so bad even my wife said "are they broken""they don't sound like this before"... when I move back to the original position and reconnected them, the issue went away...
I have contacted KEF and they said this could be caused by 'loose parts' and told me to check the shadow flare first. I noticed the shadow flare on the left speaker was not seated properly (bottom half) and I cannot push it in fully. I also suspect there is something else 'loose' but due to lockdown I cannot visit local KEF support.
The problem with R series is that the SPL drop off in 30+ degrees starts from midrange, while many competitors show drop mostly for high freq, I think this explains rather congested and lifeless vocals in KEF speakers.
Great video. I've had my R3's set up for about 6 months now. It 100% blew my mind when you talked about sound stage! I tried Monitor Audio 300 Silver just before these and those had tremendously more sound stage width than the Kef! I almost wish I'd kept them. But I really appreciate your comments about depth as well, because I've noticed that on a handful of recordings.
Before Kef R3 I tested Monitor Audio Gold 100 and they have deeper and wider sound stage, even unatural for me. Mid tones dosesn't exist in this speakers. They are classic V shape sound. The main problem was a lot of power to drive. In low volume leves sounds like shit.
I have the Q350, R3 and LS50M; purchased in that sequential order. I like all of them, however the R3s are my favorite by far.
I would love to see some hi end speakers measured, but I am sure that is restricted by availability to you, but thanks for your dedication to helping music lovers enjoy their music.
Well, I have measured the Revel F226Be and the Dutch & Dutch 8c. I’d consider those high end. But I’m assuming you’re talking about more esoteric speakers?
I have the Kef R3 in my living room, you are right the Kef's don't have a really wide sound stage. Plenty of depth, limited width. I have a pair of Totem Signatures downstairs in the family room. The Totems had a much wider sound stage. The Kef's are powered by a Cambridge Audio CXA81 sounds great! The Totems are powered by a Denon PMA-1600ne. Both systems sound great. I love listening to live recordings. Jessica Williams Live at Yoshi's comes to mind. Keith Jerret Klon Concerts. Don't get me wrong I like listening to Tool "Chocolate Chip Trip" and Steely Dan "Aja". The Totems are more home theater. The Kef R3s are excellent speakers, great for low volume listening, and really full spectrum. For me the Totem's sound better. More alive and a little faster. No need for a sub with either of these speakers. Liked your review, everyone's listening room is different, as are people's tastes. But you can't go wrong with the KEFs. The KEF's are on sale right now.
My R3s sound stage width and depth vary greatly depending on both preamp and amplifiers. The most holographic is with tubes. No real surprise here. They are very transparent.
Thank you! Looking forward to your SB-3000 review as your measurements look almost unbelievable.
Yea. I am still surprised by that.
These polar graphs really put things into perspective, amir should've done those as well.
If you're talking about my "globe" polars, those are mine. I generate those using the Klippel output data but with my own MATLAB code. They're unique to my site. 😀
@@ErinsAudioCorner Yes, I meant that I like that and I wish that Amir started doing them also
@@HyuLilium He said he wrote the code and is not open to sharing the code he developed and created.
fantastic review. unbiased, objective and carefully thought out. it looks like these speaker were carrfully designed to work with more common room environments and diffuse the sound around evenly to get that sound stage and imaging. im guessing very few people would have serious home theater setups with padded walls where sound waves are mostly absorbed instead of being reflected back.
I made it to the end! Great review. Hope you can let us know in the near future how they compare to the ls50 metas
You made it to the end!? You must have a lot of patience! LOL.
What a wonderful video..!!! I didn't understood half of it, but the parts that I did definitely where clearer than other analisis and reviews in the past that have tried to expleain some concepts to me. Thank you. (hopefully you 'll be more detailed on interpreting what the graphs mean to us in the real world)
I have a series on understanding measurements here:
ua-cam.com/play/PLnIxFR_ey0b37Ex4KV2mBz-kYB7QLffR1.html
Your reviews are so good. Great stuff as always!
Thanks, man. Hope you caught the shout-out. :)
Great job! Best tech audio review on youtube?
Awesome review! You crunched the numbers just right, and you didn't speak about "feelings" and "AB testing" like all the audiophools out there.
Just to be clear, I am a real believer in level-matched, double-blind ABX testing, but all audiophools do is do "AB testing" with no switching or any kind of controlled environment.
UNI-Q is much easier to say than "concentric". Fabulous for surround sound and multi-room architectural applications.
I haven’t used “Uni-Q” in 7 years. I literally forgot about that phrase. But, you’re right.
Best reviewer out there by far👍
Wow, thanks!
You mention that bass distortion will go away if you have a subwoofer because you will hi-pass the speaker. Many do not hi-pass even with a sub due to complexity of hi-pass options adding more electronic "layers" between source and transducer. What method of hi-pass do you recommend as being the most transparent? 1) Using a pre/int with integrated bass management (not that common), 2) Using a sub with hi-pass out (RCA/XLR) back to amp/int, 3) Convert all analogue to Digital and in the digital domain separate out signals, 4) Other? Thanks
Superb review! I especially appreciate the measurement data, being an EE type with a long-time interest in music and audio equipment!
My pleasure!
I recommend the Q350 for a lot of my friends who want an entry into the hobby. Relating to what you said about room interaction, it's hard to get people to consider room effects and treatment. So, to improve the chance of success, I go for things like the KEF and other sorts of designs that help control directivity and make placement and room quality less of an issue. In fact, I was thinking with the off-axis performance of these, they might sound best not even toed in. Many, many people don't toe their speakers because they prefer the look of a squared placement.
Just found your channel. Interesting review. I have the original LS50’s driven by a Parasound 2125 v.2, with a McIntosh C39 preamp. I have them about 3 feet from the wall, 6 feet apart. The listening position is about 7 feet. I have them on 24 inch stands, with NO toe-in. I seem to have found the best placement for my room and my taste. The treble, which on axis, could get a bit bright depending on recording, is markedly better with no toe in. Incredible depth of soundstage with orchestral music. Acoustic music and jazz sound amazing!
Keep the reviews coming! Appreciate the time you put into these.
Thank you.
Quality review m8. Intresting about room interaction with these. Makes me wonder about many youtube reveiwers rooms. They have treatments that just sit where they were put. But every speaker is different and requires different or no treatment.
Food for thought.
So true. That’s why I use both rooms but I find more often than not that the living room without treatment is better for well-designed speakers where the off-axis response follows the on-axis response.
I'd love to see I video measuring the KEF LS50's and then comparing them to this R3's...
I’d like to be able to do that. If people reach out to manufacturers with requests on my behalf they may be more inclined to send me things to test. Maybe contact Kef and ask them. Never know. :)
That's an interesting response at bass frequencies, with that shallow rolloff from 100 Hz down to 40 (?) Hz. I ended up with something similar in my last DIY build, quite by accident too (the PR's resonance frequency ended up being lower than I expected). I liked how it sounded so I didn't bother to fix it. I'm guessing "room gain" flattens it out a little.
I agree. I've not yet seen a response that does that, either. Someone gave a reason for it but I honestly don't recall what their rationale was. I'll need to go back when I get some time to read it.
I really enjoyed this video. I own the KEF R300s and I enjoy the sound that comes from this speakers.listening to Fleetwood Mac.wayman TisDale, Foreigner, sly stone, George Duke as well.i think it’s just a good speaker my opinion that’s all
Can't wait to see you thoughts on these.🤘 For the recall, I didn't like them in my room, whatever these were the best measuring passive speakers I owned. Let's see the correlation between my impressions, yours and datas. Edit: Great job as always. We are mostly on the same line, especially about soundstage and bass extension. Your In-room predicted response (as Amir's) is very close to what I got with my in-room captures.
What do you use now? What room square?
@@streamnoremorse Buchardt A500, SVS 3000 Micro(s) soon. 20m2.
@@vintageflanker7096 OK. Thanks. Why not floorstander? You have enough square. And can you describe why do you not like R3? I heard them alive. Good but not much enough. And it is correlating with youtube listening. I describe them too soft and lack of some bass in prepared room.
@@vintageflanker7096 It can be measured better even than R3. I found some graphs on Audiosciencereview.
@@streamnoremorse I test about 10 speakers/year in my room. That includes, of course, floorstanders. A500 goes (way) deeper than ANY floorstanding speaker I can afford.
You can check the R3 theard on ASR for my detailed impressions. Cheers.😉
Anxiously awaiting for this review to come out. After Amirs lukewarm subjective experience this might be a deciding factor.
I'd really like to see these compared to the Buchardt S400 MKII's. I was just about to pull the trigger on the Buchardt's but maybe I'm overlooking this speaker. How I miss the ability to audition.
If only KEF would sell them as single speakers this way they could be used for front channels!
I was struggling for a while with these speakers to get it where I wanted, there was a frequency that was sharp that was bothering me. Quad Artera Pre with Audiolab 8300 was good match for me. Another setup I found was going XLR from RME ADI-2 directly to a Yamaha P2500S, this tamed the brightness even further and the even more powerful amp seemed to provide more grunt and control of the bass. However there might be a cost in microdynamics with the pro audio amp unfortunately i havent A/B them in the same room yet. I know its not a hifi amp but if your on a budget and want the power. The new version of that should be the Yamaha XP2500. I also tried the R3s with a class D amp, the XTZ EDGE A2-300 and I didnt like the combination. Id take the Audiolab or the Yamaha any day. The Yamaha was a nice surprise to me and I could live with that. I ended up running biwire cables because I believe I heard a difference with that with the biwire setting. I believe these speakers will scale to some really pricey electronics unavailable to me but they definately want their power. These speakers are not a good match for typical 50-80w integrated amps, ive tried multiple hegel, rega etc, and the results are always lacking and the speakers dont come to life and show what they can really do.
any thoughts on getting the quad artera stereo (power amp)? I heard it's sterile and I'm also looking for warmth - I'm currently deciding between rotel rb 1582 mkii, marantz mm7025, and quad artera stereo... For my source I have a Denafrips Ares 2 and a Schiit lyr 3 with a tube, but I want to make it a bit more family friendly with having a remote with volume control so a warm power amp would be better.
@@18yearsoldnot I deliberately avoided testing the artera power amp because its not really gettting any press nor reviews. If your looking for warmth maybe try parasound?
Was wondering if you preferred these to the Elac UBR62's since those have a wide sound stage and these not so much? Was wondering how they compare with bass and stuff to the Kef R3. Love your videos! thanks.
I liked this review a lot. Good information and level description. Your mysterious dip is related to cone diameter. Most likely a reflection from the midrange cone. It shows up in all the data.
Thanks for the info, Mark. I try to resist taking guesses on this stuff so it's good to have the confirmation as to my suspicions.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Basically the safest rule of thumb to either blow up or confirm a suspicion about frequency is to calculate full wavelength at the offending frequency if it is repeatable. But I have been troubled by a 1/2 wavelength reflection and even 1/4 wavelength in different scenarios. Deeper cone or horn.
Would the R3 make a good center channel for my R3's L/R?
Nice one Erin, keep up the great work. I wonder if anything will reach the performance you achieved with the D&D 8c?
That's great and all Erin, but the real question is how does Bye Bye Bye sound on them?
In-credible! 😂
Great review Erin, very helpful. Could you say whether these or JBL HDI 1600 sound better at higher volumes? Cheers
Sorry if this opens a can of worms, but is amp matching really a thing? I just assumed power is power, regardless of brand name
How do you know, which speakers I‘m interested in?
It‘ s fun to walk the whole thing through, not too long.
Btw, I didn’t found any KEF offer for stands on their website. Are they included ?
Does „Little Village“ count as boy group?
I could really live it, I mean, really like what I see..., just the little extra above 3k is too much for me, since I like slightly laid back rather than forward. Maybe slapping some resistor here or there in x-o ;) but, then it depends on tweeter/mid off-axis patern.
The Kefs midrange cone reminds me of SBA Alu, Ceramic cones. I remember seeing in measurements the concentric tweeter's ultrasonic break-up resonance is in 30kHz range - quite an achievement for no Be dome.
Thanks for reviewing these speakers! They seem to be good ones but rather not for tube amps fans (or tube-like sound fans).
They are in fact very suitable to be tube amped to my ears.
Amazing review Erin. Klippel, What else. Thank you.
Thanks so much!
Listening to insync is akin to a migraine headache for me, but you should advertise them on your chest if that's your thing.
Did you run compression tests? They are super helpful and unique to your reviews. Otherwise it's hard to gauge how loud speakers will play.
Unfortunately, no. I hadn’t started those yet when I had these.
Hegel h95 will be ok with R3?
I ordered my set today and im curretly using the Kef q350's (after selling my Vandersteens Quatros and im looking for a great bookshelf) so im expecting a huge improvement from the Q350s.
Im also using an Svs 4000 sub with Simaudio 400m monoblocks, all Audio Research equipment ,Aurrender Streamer and Vpi Classic turntable, Im expecting big things (not unrealistic things) and I hope that these R3s deliver or on to B&W or Sonus Faber. Your logic Erin is sound, use measurements as a guide.
Did they meet your expectations??
@@rpkett yes they have. I get all of the bass, that I want with any genre of music with the sub and the ability to control it and the eq curve thru Bluetooth from my phone and the speakers themselves are great with excellent mid range and treble. I have added blue tack to the speakers/stands and put sand in the stands for rigidity.
How would you compare the R3s with the Q350s? Did you feel like the Q350s were lacking in any aspect? Thanks!
@@hyunjoonkim The R3s definitely have more bass than the Q350s. Overall I would give the edge to the R3s, because I liked the bass and midrange more. Also the R3s are a heavier speaker than the Q350s and better constructed.
I have also owned the LS50s as well, but didn't care for them because there was just too much treble, but with the right music, they could be very revealing, but the R3s were a better fit. I have since moved on from both Kef models and now have the Martin Logan 60xti and the B&W 705s2. I love trying new speakers. Good luck in your search. My final pair are yet to be determined.
Worth watching to the very, very end.
Sweet!
Regarding the shirt, wife says "You're on the right side of history."
LOL. Your wife is awesome. And even more awesome now.
It would be interesting to see how Revel M106 compare to KEF LS50 Meta about the same price!
I wonder how much does pierre EQ improves this speaker, looking at the graphs its improves the EIRR a lot.
All right man! You made me download The Cars - Heartbeat City, I've even made a playlist full of 80's on JRiver calling it 'Erin's Playlist', BUT you're not going to turn me into boybands now!!! Hahaha, love you man! What a great design of a speaker! Is it so difficult for EVERY speaker brand to do?
Boy Bands are the next natural step. LOL. Let me know how you like that album (The Cars)!
At this point i'm really curious about Kef R7, they should fade away the dryness
i do undersatnd it was a high investment in the gear, but i do wonder if you'll be only measuring new stuff or maybe some older/used, too (as in maybe do some myth busting)?
I tested the Bose 901 Series IV. Before I even had the NFS. 🙂
As far as I’m aware, I am the only person to provide anechoic data on that speaker. And I’d say it’s a “myth busting” review. 😉
ua-cam.com/video/SRmJo3y5JQI/v-deo.html
Hey Erin, after exhaustive research, I very much want to buy the LS50 metas for HT. [queue drum roll]
I have 80% HT / 20% music usage. For Hifi in the "budget", I am comfortable to move forward with LS50M. For HT, wondering if I will be better served with R3 & R2C?
My gut says LCR LS50M (I have a sub) is the right choice for my specific needs. I want speakers that are very precise, clear at LOW volume levels (when kid's sleeping) and have wide sound stage for large 12 FT U-sectional that is 10 FT from speakers (narrow room). With the woofer, obviously there are marginal gains in sound dispersion but I am so tempted by LS50M.
Have you heard the LS50 (META)? And, if not, based on your experience w/ the LS50WII, which way would you lean, LS50M or R3/R2C?
PS love the channel.
Great analysis, really enjoying your work, thanks 🙏 have you ever experienced or tested any of the Ged Lee speakers ? They have a narrow controlled dispersion and should be setup heavily toed in so your sitting off axis from both speakers. From his analysis and measurements this provides a wider sound stage in a stereo setup. PS there is Electronic music with a big sound stage 😎
@Ian Telling
Yes, some Electronic music is mixed to have a "Soundstage"....placing instruments and/or vocals in the soundstage when mixing to exhibit, width, depth, height, and specific placement, etc. Check out *DJ Smilk's - The Last Rainforest & Acoustic Crumpet*
But, I believe what Erin is referring to is the Natural Room Ambiance...the capture and reproduction of 3D Holographic Space. i.e. what a simple two-microphone stereo recording can capture at a Live performance...the 3D "space" around each instrument and/or vocal, its natural placement in the soundstage, and hearing the "space" of the actual room or venue it was recorded in.
Reverb, delay, and phase-manipulating hardware or software plugins that are used during mixing can mimic this (I've used the Bricasti M7 for this). But can't realistically reproduce the TRUE 3D holographic space of live instruments & vocals recorded at the same time at a particular venue via a Blumlein or ORTF stereo microphone setup, or a Binaural recording with the Neumann KU-100 or similar binaural "head" microphone, etc.
Check out *The Cowboy Junkies -The Trinity Session* or *Trinity Revisited* or the *Cantate Domino* performance from Reference Recordings, or any of the recordings from *Mappleshade Records*
@@bbfoto7248 I agree that it's hard to create what you refer to as the Sound Stage with just effects etc but I was thinking about the sound stage being the mix of the record in general and the sense of space a recording gives you and how that translates in listening with different types of speakers. I mentioned the Ged Lee speakers as a reference because they have a narrow dispersion but set up correctly will give the image of a wider 'sound stage' at various listening points in a room, which I think is different to what Erin has pointed out with speakers having a wider directivity giving you a greater 'Sound stage' effect. PS thanks for the recommendations of what to listen to :)
I was excited learning about the Spinorama measurements of this channel and Amir’s. I think the only thing that limits the utility of these reviews is the bottom line: most audiophiles want to know if there’s a tangible net gain if they were to trade “up”. Stereophile might be total BS, bit they do have it right in that we want compeers to be grouped together into classes of “similarly good”, and the dreck to be flagged as such. Is that possible in your future reviews?
I guess I don't really know what you want me to say? I do talk about the positive and negative attributes of the speaker with respect to both what I heard and how it measures. I can't talk about "trade up" because 1) I don't know what people are using and 2) It is hard for me to build a mental database of comparisons as I don't have decades' worth of test specimen at my disposal (not that I trust anyone's audible memory to that extent). It is going to take me time to build up that kind of library of data. Until then, direct comparisons will be limited. But when I can, I will.
@@ErinsAudioCorner I guess I'm looking for an anchor. I'd like to know what audio defects are in the reviewed samples compared to a well known neutral reference that excels at the measurement tests. I don't hear defects in speakers I used to own until I listened to a better one side by side in an A/B shootout. I believe Daniel Kumin compared every speaker he's come across against his Energy Veritas 2.8's for almost 30 years, for example. He doesn't assign his highest rating unless something is at least its equal. You can pick your own, but make it your anchor or reference point for every review forward. And anyway, it's a tax write-off. ;)
@@status101-danielho6 I think it would make most sense to choose a reference that is easily accessible to everyone, then. As opposed to a SOTA speaker. Because people can then acquire said anchor and understand the lingo when comparisons are made.
That said, while I haven’t tested many speakers myself, I do have a lot of experience listening to various systems of all types. This helps me to understand what I’m hearing and express things I like or do not like as a whole, rather than compared against a singular example.
@@status101-danielho6 (Not OP) That approach helps understand differences in some ways, but it also encourages thinking along the lines of a single axis of performance. All speakers are compromised to some degree. As in this review, the higher directivity may be better for some applications than a broader directivity of other speakers. How would one say that a speaker is "better" then? Another example would be so-called "full range" performance, generally uncommon in bookshelf speakers. Do we demerit almost all bookshelf speakers because they can't produce bass the way a tower with 15" drivers can? Anyway, there's some utility to it, to help the listener if they have also heard those same speakers. In your example, I've never heard the Energy Veritas 2.8, so it's useless to me. Hard to judge the universality of the comparison. IMO - and this is just spitballing - it's probably easiest to make a comparison to some affordable headphone that's quality and common, like the HD600. But in some ways that's also crazy talk, as headphones and speakers are quite far apart.
@@vinnytube1001 Maybe this discussion belongs in a forum rather than a YT comment. To me, it boils down to what the utility of a speaker review is to the audience. Entertainment, earning an income, providing information, etc are all valid reasons. My particular search is for a an inexpensive bookshelf speaker where I can connect to a subwoofer and know that I'm 95% of the way there to the best on the market, without putting up with obvious colorations at moderate volumes. I know for others, high SPL, aesthetics, proximity to boundaries and status matter. The measurements are nice, but I'm more interested in each speaker's relative shortcomings.
Hey dude, enjoy your reviews. I have been following you since DIYMA. I'm new to home audio and would like to see your thoughts/ reviews on preamp/integrated amplifier and DAC's for a stereo setup. Thanks for all you do! P.S. I purchased the Elac 10inch after watching your review. It sounds amazing with my UB52 2.0's.
What’s up, fellow DIYMA’r!
I don’t really test electronics because the cost for testing hardware is so high. Plus, I just don’t think that it’s a critical aspect and I feel like it’s kind of a waste of my time. But with that said, I do like to review those kind of things from the perspective of day-to-day use. I’m currently reviewing the Parasound 200 integrated amplifier and am really quite fond of it.
@@ErinsAudioCorner dude, I was actually considering that integrated app. I would love to see a video on that from you. Especially if you measure. I want to upgrade from SMSL SA300.
I wish kef would use their new meta material in this speakers...
I don't know that it would be very beneficial to be honest. But until they make one, there is no way to now for sure. 😉
@@ErinsAudioCorner why do you think the meta material would not improve the speakers!
Amazing review, very detailed - impressive!
Thanks!
I think my wife has that t-shirt and I'm not sure how I feel about that.
I'll tell you how to feel about it: steal it from her and make it your own. There. You're welcome. 😅
Which speaker perform better in measurements? LS50 or R3?
HF roll-off in predicted response is always more pronounced than in real measurement from listening position
great detailed review. thanks!!
sharp at 2kHz indeed. same with all five kef models i have owned - all the way up to the Blade. to my ears the r3 sounds the least sharp of them all. wonder if it is the reason for the sibilance associated with kef (which is the only thing I can fault these speakers for).
I've yet to hear the Blade. One day, hopefully. After I posted this review I noticed a few others echoing my sentiments so while I hate to see an "issue", I am glad to see I am not the only one and that my information is reliable. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
@@ErinsAudioCorner imo the Blade and Blade 2 are the real deal with Kef. the cabinet design puts them all together in a different league than even the Reference series which use the same drivers as the B2. nearly perfect to my ears in every respect except for that annoying tendency for sibilance in certain recordings. it wasn't there back when I could not afford very good electronics but showed up and has gotten worse as i pare then with ever more resolving, higher end gear. apparently the Meta material goes a long way to solve the same problem in the LS50, maybe it well trickle up to the Blade someday. i have thought of replacing my Blade but I am afraid that i will end up missing the 99% that they do so well. will try with toe out as suggested. often there are really simple solutions to intractable problems. once again, thanks for the extremely informative, well produced videos on your channel!!!
@@Dobbs65 thank you for your thoughtful and actionable advice!!! they are set with considerable toe out since it was first suggested. it does help with sibilance. hf bump still there... thanks again for your advice - really appreciated!
Sharp?!!! It is too soft.
Did anyone compare with some old hi-end classic monitor? For example, JMlab mini utopia? I'm wondering if there is any progress in speakers' technology over 20years. Any thoughts?
Erin, the click through for the R3 shows not available/ sold out. It’s currently on sale - you you have an updated link?
Hmmm. This is the only other one I have, currently: shop-links.co/ch7xR5xYYjo
Is the new Elac UBR62 as good as the KEF 3 as they say?
So whats your N'Sync reference track of choice Erin? Def great tracks for testing how over-production sounds on your rig! ; )
Hmmmm.... might have to be "Bye Bye Bye". Although, "Pop" is a fun one as well. :D
Bright speaker?
Great video; thanks for the good work.
Thanks for watching!
Which one do you prefer more the Elac Reference Series or these Kef R3 with same price at $2000? Thanks.
Personally?... Kef R3.
@@ErinsAudioCorner 🙏
Have you considered testing intermodulation distortion?
I do for drive units. For speakers it is different because I need to be out of the room and in the farfield. Otherwise you don’t get proper summing and you get issues with reflections and room modes.
What brand of stands do you use for the R3 s?
nice t-shirt man!
My speakers have amazing width and depth with holographic sound they are audio physics
Stop comparing this man to Amir lol let him be him
People are comparing Amir to Erin now
Can KEF concentric drivers (just the drivers) be purchased anywhere?
Not anymore. At one point many years ago they could be.
New Edition is still the best boy band ever.
Can’t believe I didn’t think of them. “If It Isn’t Love” is one of my favorites.
I even have “Cool It Now” on one of my demo discs. 👍
I don’t know how can you got such a flat curve ? The curve what I measured was way bad than this?
Audio Science Review has measured the response and Kef also provides their own response. Pretty flat. Check your process.
The equipment what I used was DEQX Premate with Earthwork M23 from the outside field.
There was a big drop from about 1000 to 3000hz .
Therefore I really don’t know how you can have that kind curve.
@@tomchou99 well, you need to reevaluate your measurement process because something is wrong. Many others have measured the R3 and what your describing doesn’t match.
I don’t want argue with you.
The production product got be different with what you tested.
My R3 bought was brand new about 8 month ago and it should completely break in already.
You probably need asking KEF what happened?
Another suggestions that you probably need to upgrade your testing room,it looks not too good for a professional sound engineer.
That ending hahahaha. 😂
Hahaha loved your shirt
Great review. Terrible tshirt haha.. Nice one 👍
What!? How dare you!!! 🤪
Thanks!
My favorite boy band is Blue Oyster Cult.
Your eye sockets look like wave guides lmfao
Niice
Tvtoohigh
Loweryoureyes
Thanks!