The KEFs sound great. I went with the 702s after comparing speakers at a local high end audio store. I think all thing considered, including build quality, we have been happy with the purchase. We all love to listen to a wide range of music and the speakers deliver.
I like both speakers. B&w is detail, forward and bright. I can hear all the instruments. KEF is more rhythmic and warm and I can enjoy the overall sound quality.
Excellent battle, and you know what I appreciate too is you using a track that has a much more broad audience, glad you DIDN'T play elevator jazz or classical, not that there's anything wrong with those genre's. :)
Within the first couple of seconds, the kefs already won it for me. I mainly just prefer the treble of all kefs over all b&ws that I've heard so far. It simply sounds sweeter to me.
KEF bias there......the B&W's treble is far superior! I have no bias toward either brand....in fact I believe a lot of 'high end' speakers are over rated and over priced.....but hey, it feeds the ego's of the rich.
@@Dvw87 WTF? Music and sound quality is subjective mate so it's on the basis that I think the B&W's have far superior treble. Sheese! BTW, it's an opinion not fact. If you don't agree, fuck off.
I love B&W's as well as KEF and own B&W's. But here I have to go with the R7. On first blush the 702's blow the KEF out of the water, they're just so lively. But I'm hearing more nuance in the relaxed presentation of the R7, as well as a more open and balanced sound overall. I'm hearing a bit more boxiness with the B&W's. Damn, I love that tweeter though, it just goes on forever! Can't go wrong with either if you got the $$$. But very different schools of thought.
This is a good comment. I’m a b&w owner too and I would say that comparing short passages of the two directly I prefer the b&w, but if I listen to both for the entirety of the song I prefer the kef.
@@SlicedBread1001 Same boat. I have owned several incarnations of the 600 series, from bookshelf to the towers. Like both of you first pass the B&Ws, but in my ears KEFs were smoother more balanced. Little more midrange and bass with the B&W. I'd like to hear the KEF R11. That in my mind would be a more fair comparison to the 702 signatures. Really hard for me to break away from B&W's I always go back to them. Have some Klipsch Forte's and don't get me wrong, there outstanding (truly are) and to my ears there an audiophile level speaker. But I keep wanting to back to B&W's. KEF are tugging at me a little as well.
@@timh4886 coincidentally I have a pair of R7’s and PMC twenty5 23i’s at home which I’m demoing next to the b&w cm8’s. I’ve not got to the kefs yet but the PMC’s are really nice
Volevo farvi i complimenti perché nonostante i limiti evidenti di youtube ecc.. si colgono comunque le differenze che ci sono tra i due diffusori e ci fanno capire sicuramente di più che le prove audio delle riviste dove i recensori danno la loro personalissima interpretazione che può essere molto diversa da quella di ciascuno di noi, tradotto: ascolta e giudica senza ascoltare gli altri in base ai tuoi gusti personali
The difference is in the representation of the sound stage. I have a pair of these B&W’s and I personally listen to anything ranging from café del mar - chill out through to the carpenters pink Floyd queen and so forth. They always make me smile they are truly very good, but in this example I have to say I think the Kef’s appear more neutral or in some ways flat but I am in no way knocking them in fact in this example I’d go for the KEF’S but I guess the moral of this is to see them side by side using your own ears both are clearly very good, all I can add is in my living room the B&W sound more
A lot of good speakers (especially British ones) are like that; they have so much midrange information/ clarity that most people take a while to get used to that type of sound.
B&W always grabs attention with their top end. But for me , extended listening always ends up being to much and fatigue sets in. Between the two the Kef’s keep the ears wanting more.
0:07 vs 3:48, at beginning, both speakers sound awesome...for the price point, I'll take the KEF. I checked and it's 6000 usd for the B&W and 3600 usd for the KEF. 2:22 vs 6:01...nice violins and depth to compare from both.
Bowers Bowers Bowers. Though I can see why people like the Kef. At first the Bowers sound threw me off a bit because their treble is so forward and the bass is not overdone but I grew to like it pretty quickly because it was so smooth. Much better than the 6 series IMO. The Kef sounds like the Kef I've known over the years. A bit more laid back....probably not going to enjoy classic rock on it as much as other speakers. Both great speakers but if I have my druthers ...the 702 S2 will be rocking out tunes in my home in a year or so.
That’s for the video, but how you think this UA-cam-based comparison shows anything substantial is beyond me?! I own the 702 S2s and they sound phenomenal. I’m sure the KEFs sounds great too, but auditioning from a UA-cam video means that you’re listening to the voicing of the speakers with the room, mic, mic preamp, and listening headphones acting as filters. To that, add psychoacoustic audio compression.That’s way too many variables which could alter the intended sound quality. Speaking to the large number of people referring to the B&Ws as “too forward” or “bright”, I assure you than when properly set up, they sound incredibly smooth and effortlessly revealing. The new midrange driver is amazing with female vocals, piano, etc. I owned KEF UNI-Qs in the 90s and ironically the issue I had with them was that their high-end was overly bright and somewhat harsh sounding. How times have changed.
reading the comments of these videos show why you should audition any speakers you want to buy instead of reviews and pricetags. Audio is the balance of science and art.
100% correct...and most importantly....YOUR OWN EARS lol. I have always felt that someone telling me that "this sounds better than this" as statement of fact is like telling me I should enjoy eating their favorite dish more than my favorite dish because it's a statement of "FACT" that their dish taste better lol. With just about any other of our senses we accept them as being total subjective, but some reason when it comes to hearing music/sound waves...we KNOW what each person should like lol?
Depends which amp you are using them with as to which will be best for you. Bright B&W with bright sounding amp will be awful, as would the warm Kefs with a warm amp. Matching equipment is key!
Большое значение имеют личные предпочтения. Мне очень нравится строгое сочетание Arcam и KEF. Детальность звучания великолепная, хотя многим звук кажется скучным, недостаточно ярким. Ну и разумеется немаловажную роль играет жанр музыки: несмотря на то, что Arcam достаточно всеяден, под настроение переключаюсь на ламповый Cary
2nd 'Demo' blows away the first; sight unseen/scrolled below the video -and listened. The 2nd 'demo' is far superior; musical integration, clarity, separation, detail, dynamics and accuracy. I've found (yet again) to discern such things over very basic playback means (Laptop computer) to be remarkable. As it turned out (and not surprisingly), the KEF 'R-7' does indeed appear to follow in the very impressive foot-steps of the superb KEF Reference series. pj
Hallo KEF I have the LS50 WIRELESS in my mid size room and they are fantastic ! They are agile , vivid , musical , engaging , with clean bass . I have a suggestion for you if you want make a larger model than LS50 WIRELESS with larger cabinet and UNI Q 6.5 inch for more bass extension for large rooms and for those who listen electonic deep house music ! If you want to make them larger they will be magnificent ! I want a larger model for my large room ! Thank you !
Tbh they’re both coloured. All speakers are, especially at this price point. Demoed both these speakers a short while ago and in person neither impressed me as neither sounded natural.
Bower's sounds a little too metallic and bright but it's bass appears to be tight and defined. KEFs were a little more laid back in the higher frequencies but in a way I like it. However, its bass is more boomy. anyone thinks the same way? In anycase, definitely the KEFs for me.
We will get at least an impression over a good headphone but I think the comparison has some drawbacks. At first, the R7 is more like the 703 since they both have 2 165mm woofers. Thus we see 2 packages which are even in a different price range. My impression is, that the volume level with R7 is slightly lower and we hear a more compressed sound. Or it is even more compressed. I do not know but it does not matter since it is "unfair" because of the 3 drivers on the B&W should produce more dynamics. The B&W sounds here more forward to me.
Winner......the first speakers.....which I ASSUME (no indication anywhere except for the video title!) were the B&W's. Second speakers sounded slightly veiled and less 'open'.
Kef is more natural/neutral sounding, while the B&W is more colored/brighter on the (high mids/treble) top end. The B&W's bright highs over shadows the bass making the bass sound less prominent while the Kefs natural/neutral top end makes the bass sound more prominent due to the frequency being more balanced.
It's really a personal choice, don't go by reviews, hear as many as you can before buying. There are so many good speakers in the under 5k to 3k range.
kefs are the smoothest speakers on the market. if you're a fan of klipsch or coming from the perspective of Atmos movie theaters they may sound too subdued but they're just really neutral and smooth speakers you can listen to all day and make out all the most subtle details. something you can't really get from these videos is the major advantage kef has, the Uni Q array which creates the most holographic sound stage.
@@johnnyquest6115 Yes really. The B&W 702 S2 measures pretty poorly for such an expensive speaker. And it sounds exactly how it measures. Exaggerated treble and uneven on and off axis performance.The time domain isn't that good either. The KEF measures better and is more neutral than the B&W.
@@vinniethegreat9645 Kef does have much better measurements -fact. But UniQ suffers from distortion at high playback levels the neodymium tiny tweeter heats up fairly quickly -(compare cooling area to say an Esotar or Wavecor tweeter for example and this has not been cured) -its physics -sure if you listen at modest levels but 100 db plus or large room then you can have problems -Stereoplay measured Kef Blade distortion at loud levels and very ordinary
Shocked I preferred the more spacious, wider, more detailed and dynamic B & W! Soundstage was crazy good as well. I don’t hear what the Kef fans are hearing. B & W is the winner by a lot.
The Key R7s sounded more recessed like the singer was singing from the back of the stage. The B&Ws sounded more up front and sounded more life-like. Little brighter but better, clearer sound.
I've owned both of the speakers and I (and all of my friends and family), can confidently say the KEF absolutely blow the B&Ws out of the water. It's not even close. By comparison, the B&W's sound like they are drowning in mud.
@@ricardogulpe6328 The R7 in walnut sounds way better than the 702 - just ask any wife:). I own 2 home theaters with B&W speakers but if I purchased a new speaker it would be the R7 and R3 in walnut with the rose gold woofers. The best looking speakers out there for the money.
If you think the 702 S2 is bright, just take a listen to the 804 D3. I was able to compare them, as well as the KEF R11 today at a dealer, and I could not stand to live with the 804 because it is just so bright. The R11 is not clear enough. The 702 is between those two in brightness/clarity and I would have picked the 702.
B&W has an exaggerated treble response. It has a big bump/suck out at 5khz depending on vertical tweeter axis. It honestly doesn’t measure very well for a $4500 usd speaker. The KEF is cheaper has better measurements and a more neutral sound. Not knocking the B&W but not sure why you would pick it over the KEF. It really isn’t even close the KEF is the better speaker and $600 usd less.
@@vinniethegreat9645 Yes, I agree that the B&W did sound overwhelming and bright. Not too sure if its the newer materials they use on their drivers. I still prefer their older stuffs, those with yellow iconic Kevlar cones. ;)
@@vinniethegreat9645 The B&Ws -NEED- room treatment (they always do), with the tweeter on top the way it is it can get way outta hand (heard them in real life, where the room/tweeter/angry gods of acoustics thing was worse than here, but it is still very much here...) and the KEF manages seemingly not anger the room acoustics by not trying to make their tweeter an omnipole...
I use an old pair of B&W 802 s2, which sound better to me than the new B&W sound. If I was to purchase a new pair of speakers it would be KEF with its more laid back East coast sound. The B&W speakers might capture your immediate attention, but ultimately they would become too fatiguing and in your face sounding to truly enjoy. Sometimes less is more.
@@TH-lo8mq That's the thing with the lively speakers. Often in demos that's what people gravitate towards first. But I've been there and done that. The KEF sounds so balanced in comparison. The R's are at the top of my short list.
Great comment lots of people go to B&Ws because of the super colored top end , very fatiguing on extended listening. Best sounding B&Ws I ve ever listened to. The PM 1s . No longer made. It’s a shame.
I was able to listen to B&W 702’s vs KEF R11 yesterday (both on sale at same price $2399, each) and, to my ears, the B&W were superior in every piece we listened to…and by a lot, actually. Currently, I own Paradigm Reference speakers and they are excellent. B&W does have a very different sound which is compelling, but when I got home and played the same pieces on my system I simply couldn’t hear such a difference to warrant spending the money. For what it’s worth, in a blind test I think it would be impossible to tell the difference between my 20 year old Paradigm speakers and the new KEF R11s.
You have to be careful making these type of comparisons comments because when you go home and listen to your speakers your mind and your ears quickly make the adjustment back to what you are use to and yes money has is a huge factor as well. The proper comparison is listening to all three at once, through maybe a switch box or better yet individually in the same acoustic environment and recording the sound, putting what you heard onto a computer and then playing back each one. The computer won’t lie to you about the music it just plays the music and you decide, but unless one speaker really did something truly different, like had way more bass or treble, your brain will quickly forget and switch back to what you are listening to at that time and if money is a factor, your brain will quickly reason you out of it. Dealers know this and the best ones that you have built up a relationship with will let you do a home trial because they know that there is a high percentage of times that you will buy the products or tell them to charge your credit card from home after listening in your personal environment, which is why they ask you a bunch of questions first about what equipment you are pairing with, the type of music that you listen to and then they do the demo in their show room to gauge your response before the home trial. The home trial is the icing on the cake.
Kef is one of the few manufacturers that publish the frequency response (on and off axis) of their speakers. The R series measure exceptionally well. Guess if B&W does... answer to who is the winner is straight forward.
Kef for me, just much more cleaner and natural. And if you were to compare the R11 to these B&W it would be a better battle because frequency response is the same on R11 and B&W.
Bowers always make speakers you have to work with but it's worth the effort. Got my 702's a few weeks ago and they are an amazing set of speakers. Got a great deal because the 702s3's are coming out
I have always been a fan of B&W speakers having owned 802's (s2) and now a pair of CM5's. I have to say that I think that the new B&W Continuum mid range driver is too much of a good thing. Seems just like listening to early 80's CD's - too forward high frequencies. I much prefer their Kevlar drivers. My CM5 2 way standmounts are much better sounding. That said, the KEF's are more soothing and less fatiguing in this video comparison.
Yes I have b&w cm8’s and demoed a set of 700 series and I found it too forward. I imagine they’ll sing with a warm or dark sounding amplifier, but I’d prefer them to be a bit more neutral off the bat.
B&W 702S much clean and wider sound! But kEF much sweet and lovely voice ! both good! For me :I like KEF R7 for soft song and Jazz music...B&W For the Rock music and movie sound
Thank you for your effort , I like these kind of debates. , In this test I believe B&W was winner because of more clarity of the sound and more details I could hear , However I do believe the comparison should be between B&W this model vs KEF R11 , The reason is B&W Price is $2500-$3000 trending now But KEF is $1999 , However the KEF R11 is $2800 , And I think it would be nicer to have both at the same level price .
sympa le comparatif mais attention entre la video et le reel, puisqu'il faut faire un choix j'aurais une tendance a preferer les bw pour le coté live et sa largeur de scene qui prend l'espace ,un peu plus rentre dedans aussi, sur les kef le son est plus doux un peu sage à mon gout avec le medium legerement en retrait, l'ecoute semble moins fatiguante sur de longue session mais j'aurais bien aimé etre dans la piece lors de ce duel ;)) merci pour la video
Both had their signatures in their sound and it's so easy to distinguish. Somehow sound room for KEF in alto range sound is better, I miss some linear part of the in baritone echo in KEF when that is in B&W. mun... I'll confess my headphone is not so good, so it's unfair to make a judge for me.
I have listened to 702s2, 804d3, R3, R7, R11, Reference1, Reference5 in person. All of them are good speakers, they have their own signature and sound. I like 804d3 diamond tweeter , 702s2 carbon tweeter is abit bright but overall it worth the price. KEF R series has better sound stage, clear vocal, bass wise not as deep as 702s2. However, personally I think you got to listen yourself and do the setup that match to your room, setups, amplifier, source, etc. Guess what, I nearly bring back 804d3 but my wife doesn't quite like the sound from it. We both were impressed by the sound stage and sound quality by reference5 but it is way too wallet unfriendly.
Interesting comparison, I found the B&W has more depth and more expansive sound. Bass is tight and a bit warmer than KEF. Mids occasionally seem to hit a little bit of resonance from the enclosure? Or maybe it’s just what some instruments sound like. The KEF actually seemed to reach lower on this test, but upper bass leaner. The highs still have a bit of metal tweeter sound that could potentially get fatiguing after a long session. Mids not as open as B&W but could be considered “cleaner” by some. Both would be nice in person. There’s only so much we can gather from a UA-cam recording.
B&W is more open ,clear, lively,mid range is bright and realistic, KEF has a DOME sound, and siblance is bit high,and sounded more of a recorded performance.
Listened using Sony WH-1000XM2 headphones. The BDubs felt like a little too punchy in the mids and bass, whereas the KEF's seemed warmer and much smoother with the vocals. I'm a KEF man, but I'd be happy with either pair, (great British sound engineering in both). Of course, get them both in a room and listen to them live they both will sound much different/better than on UA-cam with a set of headphones, LOL.
I don't care for the song but it's gorgeous on those KEF. I bet the meta version is even better. A simple rug on that hard floor would do wonders for the brightness tho. Your videos are fun and sound great too. Show us the R11 meta vs R7 meta. Anything with good kickdrums.
This is reason why there are so many brands... Everyone has it's personality. As i can see some people prefer a brand or other. I prefer sound from Dali. I found it special. Good luck to everyone who like B&W and KEF
On my birthday released / published. I have those B&W 702/S2 now 1,5 year and will upgrade to 804, kef also heave a great sound but less divided compare to the B&W so I think that last ones are a nose length in front.
high end kef and b&w are made in uk... kef start made shit long time ago after they sell their compagny... b&w its recent that produce in china they lost cost model... they was always a british conpagny put these day the economy change and everything now is made in china for cost production... high end b&w are 110% made in uk... not the case of kef they put chinesse stuff in they high end stuff... and how about Q kef speaker who sound like an old fart
Em relação ao vídeo, as vozes nas B&W702 S2 ficaram bem mais presentes, vivas e nítidas. Mas dependendo da ocasião pode passar da conta e dar sibilâncias. As B&W também possuem o som mais avançado. As KEF R7 são mais suaves e possuem o som bem mais recuado. Nos graves nem consegui notar diferença.
B&W's hands down to my ears.... Much better presence throughout the spectrum. The KEF's sounded almost muffled and not nearly as clean. Just my opinion. :)
Not just an opinion, the KEFs did sound Muffled, and muddy compared to the B&W's. A true high end speaker has a somewhat darker sound than the B&W 702 S2, a much warmer full bodied sound, you can actually have a speaker like that, without it sounding muffled like the KEF's.
@@Lasse3 I agree; the B&W was by far the winner here, based on listening through decent gear (Exposure, Sugden, Sansui, Rega Monitor Audio, Epos. Headphones: Philips SHP9500s and Sennheiser 58x Jubilee). What you describe is what every audiophile is looking for: midrange transparency, upper range extension/ clarity/ subtlety, and tight, yet extended bass response - but all of that while smooth and buttery and full-bodied at the same time (so the sound is not hard on the ears at all, which often accompanies the aforementioned qualities). It's hard to achieve that kind of sound, although over the years, I've heard a few very, very good systems that have those qualities.
I would like to hear this comparison with male voices! I am sure that in that case KEF would sound better than B&W. To my ears, KEF have better definition on bass and more natural mids. B&W sound great on treble but, again, it is a woman's voice. With male's voices I guess that it will be very different story.... thanks for this comparison!
I like to have a speaker that splits the difference between these speakers and fits somewhere in between. I find the forwardness of the B&W exciting, but it could be too much for long listening or with some songs. The KEF is a bit too relaxed so it doesn’t put out to me the details in the music, which I like.
Neither speaker sounded as they should. The room and placement were terrible. I've listened extensively to both these speakers and you could not go wrong with either. The KEF has a slightly warmer presentation giving the listener a very slight feeling of intimacy. The Bowers get everything spot on but give a little sparkle in the treble compared to the KEF's ( It's that tweeter on top ). Overall I would say this: The Bowers have slightly more insight to the music but the KEF's are slightly more musical. Take your pick.
If your listening room has hard, reflective floors, there is no way you can objectively compare one product to another. What you hear is incoherent and jumbled due to reflections from floor, sidewalls and ceiling in the room shown. That isn't the way sound engineers work and they'll be the first to tell you that. But don't blame the messenger (me), look it up. I love you all. I'm not trying to be trollish!
Die 702 kannst du nicht lang hören dann nervt der Hoch mittenbereich der den Bass übertönt, für mich ist die KEF hier der eindeutige Sieger, sehr sauber, harmonischer Klang mit ordentlich Fundament 😉👍
Kef has faster response hence clearer transients without being sibilant than b&w. Vocals are more effortless in kef. Bass is tighter too in kef but may seem less deep than b&w but may not be actually. Due to concentric tweeter kef has less transients smearing.
The KEF communicates the emotional character of the vocals and the musical arrangement with greater clarity, subtlety and refinement for me and therefore I find them more engaging - by contrast I feel like the B&Ws are shouting at me. But this is UA-cam so in reality things might be different. At the end of the day I would be happy to own either : )
The KEFs sound great. I went with the 702s after comparing speakers at a local high end audio store. I think all thing considered, including build quality, we have been happy with the purchase. We all love to listen to a wide range of music and the speakers deliver.
And the winner is .....synergy with your audio equipment and room and, your own personal preference!!
I like both speakers. B&w is detail, forward and bright. I can hear all the instruments. KEF is more rhythmic and warm and I can enjoy the overall sound quality.
I think the S3 version of this will cover all cons of B&W 702 s2 at real listening. The detail presence and overall 3d effect of S3 will win KEFs.
Excellent battle, and you know what I appreciate too is you using a track that has a much more broad audience, glad you DIDN'T play elevator jazz or classical, not that there's anything wrong with those genre's. :)
Jazz or classical are WAY better than this if you are intelligent enough to understand
Within the first couple of seconds, the kefs already won it for me. I mainly just prefer the treble of all kefs over all b&ws that I've heard so far. It simply sounds sweeter to me.
KEF bias there......the B&W's treble is far superior! I have no bias toward either brand....in fact I believe a lot of 'high end' speakers are over rated and over priced.....but hey, it feeds the ego's of the rich.
@@Dvw87 WTF? Music and sound quality is subjective mate so it's on the basis that I think the B&W's have far superior treble. Sheese! BTW, it's an opinion not fact. If you don't agree, fuck off.
@@stevemurrell6167 Oh man, that was a class A rant. Love it
@@andrewford80 Thanks.😀
B&W had a very clean bright sound as the KEF had a very clean warm sound. I'd go warm over bright.
It sound warm because mids are almost nonexistent
room doesn't seem ideal though
J Austin Your so right 👍
I love B&W's as well as KEF and own B&W's. But here I have to go with the R7. On first blush the 702's blow the KEF out of the water, they're just so lively. But I'm hearing more nuance in the relaxed presentation of the R7, as well as a more open and balanced sound overall. I'm hearing a bit more boxiness with the B&W's. Damn, I love that tweeter though, it just goes on forever! Can't go wrong with either if you got the $$$. But very different schools of thought.
This is a good comment.
I’m a b&w owner too and I would say that comparing short passages of the two directly I prefer the b&w, but if I listen to both for the entirety of the song I prefer the kef.
@@SlicedBread1001 Same boat. I have owned several incarnations of the 600 series, from bookshelf to the towers. Like both of you first pass the B&Ws, but in my ears KEFs were smoother more balanced. Little more midrange and bass with the B&W. I'd like to hear the KEF R11. That in my mind would be a more fair comparison to the 702 signatures. Really hard for me to break away from B&W's I always go back to them. Have some Klipsch Forte's and don't get me wrong, there outstanding (truly are) and to my ears there an audiophile level speaker. But I keep wanting to back to B&W's. KEF are tugging at me a little as well.
@@timh4886 coincidentally I have a pair of R7’s and PMC twenty5 23i’s at home which I’m demoing next to the b&w cm8’s.
I’ve not got to the kefs yet but the PMC’s are really nice
Volevo farvi i complimenti perché nonostante i limiti evidenti di youtube ecc.. si colgono comunque le differenze che ci sono tra i due diffusori e ci fanno capire sicuramente di più che le prove audio delle riviste dove i recensori danno la loro personalissima interpretazione che può essere molto diversa da quella di ciascuno di noi, tradotto: ascolta e giudica senza ascoltare gli altri in base ai tuoi gusti personali
I’d have go with the kef. What does it for me is the rendition of the violins. More body and harmonic richness and so more realistic.
The difference is in the representation of the sound stage. I have a pair of these B&W’s and I personally listen to anything ranging from café del mar - chill out through to the carpenters pink Floyd queen and so forth. They always make me smile they are truly very good, but in this example I have to say I think the Kef’s appear more neutral or in some ways flat but I am in no way knocking them in fact in this example I’d go for the KEF’S but I guess the moral of this is to see them side by side using your own ears both are clearly very good, all I can add is in my living room the B&W sound more
KEF for all day listening. B&W more punchy for entertaining
702 S2 takes a bit of acclimatization because it's so good at separating out distinct sounds.
But then i'm biased as i'm getting the 702 on Friday !
A lot of good speakers (especially British ones) are like that; they have so much midrange information/ clarity that most people take a while to get used to that type of sound.
B&W always grabs attention with their top end. But for me , extended listening always ends up being to much and fatigue sets in. Between the two the Kef’s keep the ears wanting more.
Yes......wanting more detail. They actually sound veiled, not warm.
Yup, B&W has warm bass and a bit sharp highs...they sound better on short than long term
Yes agreed. I would prefer the kefs to be a smidge more open in the top end, but over all the balance of the kefs is easier to listen to.
@@SlicedBread1001 Spot on. Kept thinking am I the only one who heard that.
Well said! 🎶
KEF R7 more natural and sweet !
I have to go with B&W. It brings out all the details nicely. Although R7 is still a great pair.
0:07 vs 3:48, at beginning, both speakers sound awesome...for the price point, I'll take the KEF.
I checked and it's 6000 usd for the B&W and 3600 usd for the KEF.
2:22 vs 6:01...nice violins and depth to compare from both.
Bowers Bowers Bowers. Though I can see why people like the Kef. At first the Bowers sound threw me off a bit because their treble is so forward and the bass is not overdone but I grew to like it pretty quickly because it was so smooth. Much better than the 6 series IMO. The Kef sounds like the Kef I've known over the years. A bit more laid back....probably not going to enjoy classic rock on it as much as other speakers. Both great speakers but if I have my druthers ...the 702 S2 will be rocking out tunes in my home in a year or so.
If you don't toe in the B&W speaker, it will sound more neutral in the best listening position.
i prefer the brightness of the B&W's, thanks for sharing
That’s for the video, but how you think this UA-cam-based comparison shows anything substantial is beyond me?! I own the 702 S2s and they sound phenomenal. I’m sure the KEFs sounds great too, but auditioning from a UA-cam video means that you’re listening to the voicing of the speakers with the room, mic, mic preamp, and listening headphones acting as filters. To that, add psychoacoustic audio compression.That’s way too many variables which could alter the intended sound quality. Speaking to the large number of people referring to the B&Ws as “too forward” or “bright”, I assure you than when properly set up, they sound incredibly smooth and effortlessly revealing. The new midrange driver is amazing with female vocals, piano, etc. I owned KEF UNI-Qs in the 90s and ironically the issue I had with them was that their high-end was overly bright and somewhat harsh sounding. How times have changed.
but even with all this variables, which are the same for both boxes, I would choose B&W
I like by far the first ones, BW?
The second lacks discrimination, at least through the chain that makes it
KEF R7, very pleasant sound, bravo! The B&W sound to me somehow ''boxy'', I don't sense the peace and freedom of sound that the KEF provides...
reading the comments of these videos show why you should audition any speakers you want to buy instead of reviews and pricetags. Audio is the balance of science and art.
100% correct...and most importantly....YOUR OWN EARS lol. I have always felt that someone telling me that "this sounds better than this" as statement of fact is like telling me I should enjoy eating their favorite dish more than my favorite dish because it's a statement of "FACT" that their dish taste better lol. With just about any other of our senses we accept them as being total subjective, but some reason when it comes to hearing music/sound waves...we KNOW what each person should like lol?
Depends which amp you are using them with as to which will be best for you. Bright B&W with bright sounding amp will be awful, as would the warm Kefs with a warm amp. Matching equipment is key!
Большое значение имеют личные предпочтения. Мне очень нравится строгое сочетание Arcam и KEF. Детальность звучания великолепная, хотя многим звук кажется скучным, недостаточно ярким. Ну и разумеется немаловажную роль играет жанр музыки: несмотря на то, что Arcam достаточно всеяден, под настроение переключаюсь на ламповый Cary
Hi...i have amp musical fidelity m5si...which of theese two would match better?
Ty
No such thing as a bright amp or a warm amp.
2nd 'Demo' blows away the first; sight unseen/scrolled below the video -and listened. The 2nd 'demo' is far superior; musical integration, clarity, separation, detail, dynamics and accuracy. I've found (yet again) to discern such things over very basic playback means (Laptop computer) to be remarkable.
As it turned out (and not surprisingly), the KEF 'R-7' does indeed appear to follow in the very impressive foot-steps of the superb KEF Reference series.
pj
I like the detail and top end of the b&ws but prefer the more balanced kef with it's better midrange.
B&W bright sounding, KEF emphasis on the s sounds of the voice, not as bright as B&W
I clearly notice (via a youtube video) on my receiver, that the B&W sounds way more "alive".
Hallo KEF I have the LS50 WIRELESS in my mid size room and they are fantastic ! They are agile , vivid , musical , engaging , with clean bass . I have a suggestion for you if you want make a larger model than LS50 WIRELESS with larger cabinet and UNI Q 6.5 inch for more bass extension for large rooms and for those who listen electonic deep house music ! If you want to make them larger they will be magnificent ! I want a larger model for my large room ! Thank you !
The B&W have colored sound, whereas the Kef are more flat as speakers should be so you can really hear the original mastered recording as it was.
But the B&W have the soundstage presence. Yes, it is more revealing but it depends what you play through them.
Tbh they’re both coloured. All speakers are, especially at this price point.
Demoed both these speakers a short while ago and in person neither impressed me as neither sounded natural.
@@SlicedBread1001 yeah, you’re probably right.
Me choose second, it sound better than first
Bower's sounds a little too metallic and bright but it's bass appears to be tight and defined. KEFs were a little more laid back in the higher frequencies but in a way I like it. However, its bass is more boomy. anyone thinks the same way?
In anycase, definitely the KEFs for me.
Yes I’d agree.
I would worry about how the kefs bass behaves in room when closer to the walls. But from this I prefer kef
These sound incredible through my $20 PC speakers.
And the sound is only $20
KEF the king of speakers.KEF is warm and smooth.
We will get at least an impression over a good headphone but I think the comparison has some drawbacks. At first, the R7 is more like the 703 since they both have 2 165mm woofers. Thus we see 2 packages which are even in a different price range. My impression is, that the volume level with R7 is slightly lower and we hear a more compressed sound. Or it is even more compressed. I do not know but it does not matter since it is "unfair" because of the 3 drivers on the B&W should produce more dynamics. The B&W sounds here more forward to me.
Clearly Bowers. The clarity and fidelity is supreme. KEF is playing throug a dirty cloth
You are old already ;)
After going back and forth a dozen times I gotta say........B&W
BUT they are both pretty damn good.
i did the same and agree 100%
My choise KEF R7 !
Winner......the first speakers.....which I ASSUME (no indication anywhere except for the video title!) were the B&W's. Second speakers sounded slightly veiled and less 'open'.
Kef is more natural/neutral sounding, while the B&W is more colored/brighter on the (high mids/treble) top end.
The B&W's bright highs over shadows the bass making the bass sound less prominent while the Kefs natural/neutral top end makes the bass sound more prominent due to the frequency being more balanced.
It's really a personal choice, don't go by reviews, hear as many as you can before buying. There are so many good speakers in the under 5k to 3k range.
Kef R7 is the winner. Natural, neutral und relaxed, more as it should be.
Completely agree
kefs are the smoothest speakers on the market. if you're a fan of klipsch or coming from the perspective of Atmos movie theaters they may sound too subdued but they're just really neutral and smooth speakers you can listen to all day and make out all the most subtle details.
something you can't really get from these videos is the major advantage kef has, the Uni Q array which creates the most holographic sound stage.
B&W 702 S2 my choice :)
B&W. Her voice was nicer and the bass was more fleshed out. I could hear the difference right away. 🤘👽🤘
KEF for sure, more natural.
Not really.
Background is very clean.
More analog from it.
That's KEF.
@@johnnyquest6115 Yes really. The B&W 702 S2 measures pretty poorly for such an expensive speaker. And it sounds exactly how it measures. Exaggerated treble and uneven on and off axis performance.The time domain isn't that good either. The KEF measures better and is more neutral than the B&W.
@@vinniethegreat9645 Kef does have much better measurements -fact. But UniQ suffers from distortion at high playback levels the neodymium tiny tweeter heats up fairly quickly -(compare cooling area to say an Esotar or Wavecor tweeter for example and this has not been cured) -its physics -sure if you listen at modest levels but 100 db plus or large room then you can have problems -Stereoplay measured Kef Blade distortion at loud levels and very ordinary
for the vocal sound not so natural then B&W
Should probably compare the R11s to the 702s. In terms of price point R7s are closer to 703s.
Agreed. R11 would probably have been a better match up?
Shocked I preferred the more spacious, wider, more detailed and dynamic B & W! Soundstage was crazy good as well. I don’t hear what the Kef fans are hearing. B & W is the winner by a lot.
The Key R7s sounded more recessed like the singer was singing from the back of the stage. The B&Ws sounded more up front and sounded more life-like. Little brighter but better, clearer sound.
I've owned both of the speakers and I (and all of my friends and family), can confidently say the KEF absolutely blow the B&Ws out of the water. It's not even close. By comparison, the B&W's sound like they are drowning in mud.
@@thetrumanshow4791 i disagree completly b&w sounds fantastic
@@thetrumanshow4791 Hahaha, an obvious B&W hater!!! Well, keep hating if that’s what makes you feel good…”CAPISCE!”
@@ricardogulpe6328 The R7 in walnut sounds way better than the 702 - just ask any wife:). I own 2 home theaters with B&W speakers but if I purchased a new speaker it would be the R7 and R3 in walnut with the rose gold woofers. The best looking speakers out there for the money.
@@ricardogulpe6328 to me, R7 sounds better in rock music, it depends on the genre. Classic music sounds clearer and better in B&W 702
If you think the 702 S2 is bright, just take a listen to the 804 D3. I was able to compare them, as well as the KEF R11 today at a dealer, and I could not stand to live with the 804 because it is just so bright. The R11 is not clear enough. The 702 is between those two in brightness/clarity and I would have picked the 702.
Can equalizer fix ‘too bright’ ? Thks recently bought 704 s2
B&W more dynamic to me, KEF more flat, but doesn't mean it lacks details.
B&W has an exaggerated treble response. It has a big bump/suck out at 5khz depending on vertical tweeter axis. It honestly doesn’t measure very well for a $4500 usd speaker. The KEF is cheaper has better measurements and a more neutral sound. Not knocking the B&W but not sure why you would pick it over the KEF. It really isn’t even close the KEF is the better speaker and $600 usd less.
@@vinniethegreat9645 Yes, I agree that the B&W did sound overwhelming and bright. Not too sure if its the newer materials they use on their drivers. I still prefer their older stuffs, those with yellow iconic Kevlar cones. ;)
@@vinniethegreat9645 The B&Ws -NEED- room treatment (they always do), with the tweeter on top the way it is it can get way outta hand (heard them in real life, where the room/tweeter/angry gods of acoustics thing was worse than here, but it is still very much here...) and the KEF manages seemingly not anger the room acoustics by not trying to make their tweeter an omnipole...
I use an old pair of B&W 802 s2, which sound better to me than the new B&W sound. If I was to purchase a new pair of speakers it would be KEF with its more laid back East coast sound. The B&W speakers might capture your immediate attention, but ultimately they would become too fatiguing and in your face sounding to truly enjoy. Sometimes less is more.
Her voice sounds clearer with the bowers but super harsh. They would be fatiguing over time.
100%. Reminds me a bit of the Klipsch horns. I need to hear these KEFs in person now.
@@TH-lo8mq That's the thing with the lively speakers. Often in demos that's what people gravitate towards first. But I've been there and done that. The KEF sounds so balanced in comparison. The R's are at the top of my short list.
Great comment lots of people go to B&Ws because of the super colored top end , very fatiguing on extended listening. Best sounding B&Ws I ve ever listened to. The PM 1s . No longer made. It’s a shame.
I was able to listen to B&W 702’s vs KEF R11 yesterday (both on sale at same price $2399, each) and, to my ears, the B&W were superior in every piece we listened to…and by a lot, actually. Currently, I own Paradigm Reference speakers and they are excellent. B&W does have a very different sound which is compelling, but when I got home and played the same pieces on my system I simply couldn’t hear such a difference to warrant spending the money. For what it’s worth, in a blind test I think it would be impossible to tell the difference between my 20 year old Paradigm speakers and the new KEF R11s.
You have to be careful making these type of comparisons comments because when you go home and listen to your speakers your mind and your ears quickly make the adjustment back to what you are use to and yes money has is a huge factor as well.
The proper comparison is listening to all three at once, through maybe a switch box or better yet individually in the same acoustic environment and recording the sound, putting what you heard onto a computer and then playing back each one.
The computer won’t lie to you about the music it just plays the music and you decide, but unless one speaker really did something truly different, like had way more bass or treble, your brain will quickly forget and switch back to what you are listening to at that time and if money is a factor, your brain will quickly reason you out of it.
Dealers know this and the best ones that you have built up a relationship with will let you do a home trial because they know that there is a high percentage of times that you will buy the products or tell them to charge your credit card from home after listening in your personal environment, which is why they ask you a bunch of questions first about what equipment you are pairing with, the type of music that you listen to and then they do the demo in their show room to gauge your response before the home trial. The home trial is the icing on the cake.
@@sidvicious3129 thank you for taking the time to respond. I appreciate each point you make.
Kef is one of the few manufacturers that publish the frequency response (on and off axis) of their speakers. The R series measure exceptionally well. Guess if B&W does... answer to who is the winner is straight forward.
It's not easy
Kef for me, just much more cleaner and natural. And if you were to compare the R11 to these B&W it would be a better battle because frequency response is the same on R11 and B&W.
This recording favors KEF more but on Rock Jazz and instrumwntal B&W will rock where KEF is just this polite but drier and less emotional sound.
I love my 702 S2 now but it was a hard way! The problem for most of us are room modes. If you can get rid of them, the 702 S2 will sound sweet.
Bowers always make speakers you have to work with but it's worth the effort. Got my 702's a few weeks ago and they are an amazing set of speakers. Got a great deal because the 702s3's are coming out
Both are great speakers. Guess it just depends on personal preference. I lean slightly KEF. But would be happy with either.
I have always been a fan of B&W speakers having owned 802's (s2) and now a pair of CM5's. I have to say that I think that the new B&W Continuum mid range driver is too much of a good thing. Seems just like listening to early 80's CD's - too forward high frequencies. I much prefer their Kevlar drivers. My CM5 2 way standmounts are much better sounding. That said, the KEF's are more soothing and less fatiguing in this video comparison.
Yes I have b&w cm8’s and demoed a set of 700 series and I found it too forward.
I imagine they’ll sing with a warm or dark sounding amplifier, but I’d prefer them to be a bit more neutral off the bat.
B&W 702S much clean and wider sound! But kEF much sweet and lovely voice ! both good! For me :I like KEF R7 for soft song and Jazz music...B&W For the Rock music and movie sound
Wow! they both sound just like my nice GNP 2 way desk speakers I have on my computer!
WOW!!! Vanessa Williams!!! I haven't heard this song in many,many years!!!
SOLD 702 S2 ! thank you !!
the 702 S2 is the Best EVER ! I Love it !!!!!
Clearly the B&W.
Thank you for your effort , I like these kind of debates. , In this test I believe B&W was winner because of more clarity of the sound and more details I could hear , However I do believe the comparison should be between B&W this model vs KEF R11 , The reason is B&W Price is $2500-$3000 trending now But KEF is $1999 , However the KEF R11 is $2800 , And I think it would be nicer to have both at the same level price .
I just went to my local Best Buy and listened to both the results were same I personally liked the B&W over the KEF R11.
@@THEHULK209 Thank You for your review .
B&Ws are transparent and pure, Kefs rolled off on highs and dark
In the USA the KEF R11 is only $500 more than the B&W 702 S2's. So it's an easy choice. KEF R11.
100x prettier too rather than an ugly tweeter looking like a rat 🐀 on top of a speaker.
The second pair has a humble personality; the first sounded more proud in its frequency response and realism.
Both are great, my choise is Kef.
sympa le comparatif mais attention entre la video et le reel, puisqu'il faut faire un choix j'aurais une tendance a preferer les bw pour le coté live et sa largeur de scene qui prend l'espace ,un peu plus rentre dedans aussi, sur les kef le son est plus doux un peu sage à mon gout avec le medium legerement en retrait, l'ecoute semble moins fatiguante sur de longue session mais j'aurais bien aimé etre dans la piece lors de ce duel ;)) merci pour la video
Can’t wait for my KEF R7s to arrive...
What amp are you going with? I'm thinking of buying them also and dont know what amp to buy.
Both had their signatures in their sound and it's so easy to distinguish. Somehow sound room for KEF in alto range sound is better, I miss some linear part of the in baritone echo in KEF when that is in B&W. mun... I'll confess my headphone is not so good, so it's unfair to make a judge for me.
I have listened to 702s2, 804d3, R3, R7, R11, Reference1, Reference5 in person. All of them are good speakers, they have their own signature and sound. I like 804d3 diamond tweeter , 702s2 carbon tweeter is abit bright but overall it worth the price. KEF R series has better sound stage, clear vocal, bass wise not as deep as 702s2. However, personally I think you got to listen yourself and do the setup that match to your room, setups, amplifier, source, etc.
Guess what, I nearly bring back 804d3 but my wife doesn't quite like the sound from it.
We both were impressed by the sound stage and sound quality by reference5 but it is way too wallet unfriendly.
Interesting comparison, I found the B&W has more depth and more expansive sound. Bass is tight and a bit warmer than KEF. Mids occasionally seem to hit a little bit of resonance from the enclosure? Or maybe it’s just what some instruments sound like.
The KEF actually seemed to reach lower on this test, but upper bass leaner. The highs still have a bit of metal tweeter sound that could potentially get fatiguing after a long session. Mids not as open as B&W but could be considered “cleaner” by some.
Both would be nice in person. There’s only so much we can gather from a UA-cam recording.
Both sound amazing. Can’t go wrong with either one
B&W is more open ,clear, lively,mid range is bright and realistic, KEF has a DOME sound, and siblance is bit high,and sounded more of a recorded performance.
B&W 702 S2 win!🔥🔥🔥
Listened using Sony WH-1000XM2 headphones. The BDubs felt like a little too punchy in the mids and bass, whereas the KEF's seemed warmer and much smoother with the vocals. I'm a KEF man, but I'd be happy with either pair, (great British sound engineering in both). Of course, get them both in a room and listen to them live they both will sound much different/better than on UA-cam with a set of headphones, LOL.
B&W "fan" & owner but yep the KEFs win this 1 having said that this is not the music I'd listen too. Likely the B&Ws would suit my choice of music.
I don't care for the song but it's gorgeous on those KEF. I bet the meta version is even better. A simple rug on that hard floor would do wonders for the brightness tho. Your videos are fun and sound great too. Show us the R11 meta vs R7 meta. Anything with good kickdrums.
Âm thanh B&W sáng hơn. Nhưng cả 2 điều tuyệt vời. Cảm ơn bạn đã cho chúng tôi những phút giây thật hạnh phúc
Nhieu nguoi chon KEF qua nhi. Ma KEF thi re hon kha nhieu so voi B&W. So với giá tiền thì mình chọn KEF. Nhìn đẹp và ngầu hơn luôn :-)
This is reason why there are so many brands... Everyone has it's personality. As i can see some people prefer a brand or other. I prefer sound from Dali. I found it special. Good luck to everyone who like B&W and KEF
On my birthday released / published. I have those B&W 702/S2 now 1,5 year and will upgrade to 804, kef also heave a great sound but less divided compare to the B&W so I think that last ones are a nose length in front.
b&w for me
I have a pair of KEF R7s & to me they are the best I have heard , Top Notch .
有点不公平，B&W702 S2是7系列的旗舰型号，而KEF R7只是是R系列的中级型号，要对比应该选和B&W702 S2同等级的KEF R11来对比，对于这次的对比我觉得B&W702 S2的声音更饱满 更厚 更结实，KEF R7声音更平衡中性，全频的衔接更平顺，动态更宽，人声更灵活，结像更清晰一点，声音更自然，但声音太清淡了，客观的说B&W702 S2和KEF R7各有各的风格。
Ваш коммент наиболее правдив , неоспоримо . .
اتفق معك جداً.كان يجب المقارنة مع الR11. شخصياً افضل ال B&W عن حيادية الKef.
I vote the 2nd because it has much warm and rich sound
what the fuck loll b&w eat them FAR AWAY
B&W, made in China ! Can't trust b & W components .
kef also made in china ;)
high end kef and b&w are made in uk... kef start made shit long time ago after they sell their compagny... b&w its recent that produce in china they lost cost model... they was always a british conpagny put these day the economy change and everything now is made in china for cost production... high end b&w are 110% made in uk... not the case of kef they put chinesse stuff in they high end stuff... and how about Q kef speaker who sound like an old fart
also chineese production is not as bad as we think... in the past yes it was... but china produce 80% of things
Em relação ao vídeo, as vozes nas B&W702 S2 ficaram bem mais presentes, vivas e nítidas. Mas dependendo da ocasião pode passar da conta e dar sibilâncias. As B&W também possuem o som mais avançado. As KEF R7 são mais suaves e possuem o som bem mais recuado. Nos graves nem consegui notar diferença.
Ah one of those old familiar David foster productions! Nice b&w but will be keeping my b&w matrix 802 series 3😀
B&W's hands down to my ears.... Much better presence throughout the spectrum. The KEF's sounded almost muffled and not nearly as clean. Just my opinion. :)
Not just an opinion, the KEFs did sound Muffled, and muddy compared to the B&W's.
A true high end speaker has a somewhat darker sound than the B&W 702 S2, a much warmer full bodied sound, you can actually have a speaker like that, without it sounding muffled like the KEF's.
@@Lasse3 I agree; the B&W was by far the winner here, based on listening through decent gear (Exposure, Sugden, Sansui, Rega Monitor Audio, Epos. Headphones: Philips SHP9500s and Sennheiser 58x Jubilee). What you describe is what every audiophile is looking for: midrange transparency, upper range extension/ clarity/ subtlety, and tight, yet extended bass response - but all of that while smooth and buttery and full-bodied at the same time (so the sound is not hard on the ears at all, which often accompanies the aforementioned qualities).
It's hard to achieve that kind of sound, although over the years, I've heard a few very, very good systems that have those qualities.
@@BadMonkeyFinger_Audio DAC #Teac UD505 (DSD 22,4 MHZ Upsampling)
Amp# Darkvoice with RCA power tube and ElektroHarmonix driver tube
Speakers# SBA761
Headphones# HD800S
turntable #Teac TN-4D
Yes I'm done flexing now..
I would like to hear this comparison with male voices! I am sure that in that case KEF would sound better than B&W. To my ears, KEF have better definition on bass and more natural mids. B&W sound great on treble but, again, it is a woman's voice. With male's voices I guess that it will be very different story.... thanks for this comparison!
1st was way better performing. I love the song, good to hear it again. Thx
Awesome song. Superb video.
I like the second demo, don’t know which brand it is . The sound is a lot clearer and more spacious feels more easy to the ear!
The low end on the B&Ws was way superior.
though both are in desperate need of a solid subwoofer
I like to have a speaker that splits the difference between these speakers and fits somewhere in between. I find the forwardness of the B&W exciting, but it could be too much for long listening or with some songs. The KEF is a bit too relaxed so it doesn’t put out to me the details in the music, which I like.
Kef r7 jest szczególowy
Maybe ur interested in Dali?
I love them both for different reasons.
Neither speaker sounded as they should. The room and placement were terrible. I've listened extensively to both these speakers and you could not go wrong with either. The KEF has a slightly warmer presentation giving the listener a very slight feeling of intimacy. The Bowers get everything spot on but give a little sparkle in the treble compared to the KEF's ( It's that tweeter on top ). Overall I would say this: The Bowers have slightly more insight to the music but the KEF's are slightly more musical. Take your pick.
Jason Warren
Great observation😬
If your listening room has hard, reflective floors, there is no way you can objectively compare one product to another. What you hear is incoherent and jumbled due to reflections from floor, sidewalls and ceiling in the room shown. That isn't the way sound engineers work and they'll be the first to tell you that. But don't blame the messenger (me), look it up. I love you all. I'm not trying to be trollish!
Die 702 kannst du nicht lang hören dann nervt der Hoch mittenbereich der den Bass übertönt, für mich ist die KEF hier der eindeutige Sieger, sehr sauber, harmonischer Klang mit ordentlich Fundament 😉👍
Kef has faster response hence clearer transients without being sibilant than b&w. Vocals are more effortless in kef. Bass is tighter too in kef but may seem less deep than b&w but may not be actually. Due to concentric tweeter kef has less transients smearing.
The KEF communicates the emotional character of the vocals and the musical arrangement with greater clarity, subtlety and refinement for me and therefore I find them more engaging - by contrast I feel like the B&Ws are shouting at me. But this is UA-cam so in reality things might be different. At the end of the day I would be happy to own either : )