Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by robertzombie, Jun 13, 2016.
You didn't like the R series?
You're causing me wallet problems. I've not heard the LS50s..
But I can't believe the R series have less than stellar crossovers. I know the Q didn't have the best. I had the Q100.
Maybe I won't listen to the LS50s as you say... they're one of a kind. might have to step up to the blade to get that sound and I definitely can't afford them.
But in terms of the R series.. I've owned at some point everything except the R700. literally I've had or have everything and I agree there are differences. The R900 being way way above the others. the sub is very good too. but a set of R900s was far more pleasing than a set of R500 and dual R400b that I had for a while.
Carry on. don't mean to hijack your awesome thread.
It's probably too long ago to accurately remember, but I think the bass was a bit samey across the board. It didn't have the variety (or, IMO, accuracy) of the LS50.
I heard the R100 in a demo. Very unimpressed. The Tannoy DC4 was the better option (for me).
The crossover components in the R series are fine. It is the values of the caps, coils and resistors in the circuit that affect the voicing / character of the speaker. KEF have strategically made these speakers sound completely different.
Custom Design has just introduced a purpose-built LS50 stand. Just ordered a pair in black!
Not trying to start a burn-in debate but I'm pretty sure you'd have to swap brains in this scenario to figure that one out.
Not to mention the breaking-in time for the new brain.
Not necessary. I took a basic frequency sweep measurement when they were brand new, and again when I thought they'd broken in
I found that LS50 is great for vocal, but a bit too small for loud dynamic music. The amp I tried was either class ab or digital amp in the range of 125 to 150 watts for 8 ohm (all can handle 4 ohm).
So, it is now the surrounds of my 5.1 music only setup. Mains is Paradigm Studio 10, also small. Now, together with the center speaker, I have 5 tweeters and 6 small woofers (powered by two different amps) and a big sub all work very well together. This arrangement works really well for loud, dynamic music.
Having LS50 as the surround added a lot to the soundstage and details. Very happy with it!
I suppose it depends what you define as "loud", but I regularly have my LS50s playing dynamic music at ~84 dB and wouldn't call the sound small or say that the size of the speaker calls attention to itself. My room is quite small though (3x4m). I also use them with movies (2 channel only) and they sound incredible. Films are much more dynamic than music and I think the LS50s handle films well.
You are right, should define loud a bit better. When I meant loud, I mean average volume of near 90 db with peaks of around 100 db. I don't listen to all song like this, but some live rock recordings do sound really good at such level where the bass really "hits" me. : ).
At this loud level, just with the LS50, even with a sub, it sounded stressed out and does not sound good by themselves. But, as part of a 5.1 setup, sounds relax and really really good. The LS50 adds a lot to the soundstage and details.
My current room is about 13' w* 23' l * 19' h with openings to upstairs and kitchen. But I am using the front half of room only.
I don't understand comments like this. Quality modern SS amps have ruler flat frequency response in the audible range. For example, the specs for the NAD 326BEE indicate that its tolerance is plus or minus one tenth of a dB from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. How is it possible to "emphasize midrange" in that context?
Just want to say that I LOVE when someone actually gets off their ass and goes and LISTENS to some speakers and then compares them, rather than just blind buying something.
Enjoyed reading your observations. Thanks for posting.
That's really loud to the point of damaging your hearing! Are you sure it wasn't your ears getting stressed out?
Yes, dangerously loud.
With 5.1, I don't get stressed out at loud level. Just 2.1 or 2.0 I get stressed out at loud level. I think this is because with 5.1, the speakers don't need to work as hard to get to the same loud level. Due to this, 5.1 sounded smooth with the bonus of hugh sound stage and details.
Come of think about it, I supposed I could damage my hearing easier with 5.1 than 2.1. This is because I could listen to loud music longer than 2.0. I will definitely try doing loud song once in a while instead of constantly for multiple songs.
May I suggest that you try listening to different amps to hear for yourself? I am NOT a subjective guy. But I have listened to enough amps to strongly suspect that manufactures try to distinguish their products by manipulating their amps' frequency response. You say that modern amps have "ruler flat" response in the audible range. I disagree. One common trick that I have seen is that some manufacturers roll off their response faster above 10 kHz to make their amps sound "more musical". You can compare amps' measurements (not claimed response) to see for yourself.
I have seen it mentioned all the time that this amp sounds warm and that amp sounds analytical, etc. Whether or not you want to believe or understand it is not my concern. But frankly, if many people say things like this, I would want to find it out for myself, rather than having an untested faith in "ruler flat" claims of manufacturers.
Separate names with a comma.