KEF LS50 Wireless or LS50 + New Amp?

Thank for that response, Mike! Do you still have the Sierra NrTs? What amp we’re you using to drive them? Did you ever hear the standard Sierra I?

 

I do not have the NrT's. But don't hold that against them. I have an illness when it comes to speakers. I feel like before I die I must try every speaker ever made. It was with a long heart that I sold them. I moved up to the Sierra 2 when I sold the NrT.

I drove all three speakers with a Rogue Cronus Magnum II. I am now using a Cary SLI-80 but have only used that amp with the LS50's.

Never heard the Sierra 1 but have read numerous times from people who owned both the 1 and the NrT that the one was an excellent speaker but lacked a bit of detail. Not in a bad way, it just came in more on the warm side. Whereas the NrT gives you detail in spades.

Honestly you can't go wrong with any of those 3.

 

Haha well I’m glad there are folks like you out there that I can talk to about their experiences as I certainly don’t have the means to get new gear very often.

You make a great case for the NrTs. My room is very untreated. Hardwood floors and a couple of large windows (I have thick curtains I can draw over them though). Nothing on the walls except art in picture frames. Do you think the NrTs would play well in a room like that?

I have read elsewhere that many people prefer the NrT to the RAAL for rock and roll (mostly what I listen to - Bob Dylan, Dead, Beatles, etc).

Dave said he has had good experience with the NAD C 316BEE, so that is encouraging. He doubted that I would use half the power available in the amp with the Sierra bookshelves.

Sorry to get off topic here - I know this is a thread for the LS50 wireless...

 

The USB input is for connecting a PC or Mac. You need to go into audio settings on your computer and select the output device as LS50W for it to work. This isn't something you can do from an iPhone or tablet (as far as I am aware)...

I use bluetooth for streaming music from my iPhone. If you're intent on it being hardwired then you'd need something like the Pure i-20 iPhone dock that has optical out for connecting to the LS50W.

 

You could always try them for 30 days and for around 50.00 send them back if you hate them -doubt you would. I think as long as you pull the curtains, that room should be fine. My room was similar but I do have a small area run under my desk. The NrT are not hard, shrill, etched or cold or anything close to that, they just throw out some really good highs and if that is your thing they are worth a demo. That said the LS50's are very good as well and lots of guys on here who's opinion I value like them. For all around good sound you could do worse and I am sure you can find a pair used. Here's what I would say....if you want a musical speaker, go LS50. If you want a detailed, critical listening speaker go NrT. I know some guys will say the LS50 is a critical listening speaker, and for speakers that you can buy in a big box store, they are, but those people have not heard the Sierra line up. That is where they excel. They are dead neutral and will give you exactly what is on the source. That may be your thing and it may not be. Only you can decide. I hope that helps?

 

I liked the LS50 enough to buy a pair of the wireless version. There's not a lot of difference in the sound except with the LS50W I seem to get quite a bit more bass; it seems deeper and more prominent. This is quite a feat for such a small speaker.

My only problem with the LS50W is that I may end up missing the ability to "play" with ancillary equipment. I do find myself not thinking about the equipment while listening, and I call that a plus. We'll see how long that lasts.

 

This is inherent in tech purchases in general. One thought is KEF updates may adjust.

It was a tight purchase $ for us and...

Well, it’s somethjng we recently talked about taking assessment of what we are thankful for in life.

We got the KEF subwoofer reasonably.

Our thinking was that going from Chord Electronics DAC and high end headphones, we would not enjoy a step down in music (like on the car).

KEF is the perfect fit for us, including critical or concentrated listening; not just background music.

 

Definitely helpful - thank you! I think I’m going to go with one of the Sierras - either NrT or II. Aside from supporting a small, US company with great support, I think they will give me more flexibility if I move to a larger room and will give me more satisfying bass (which is important to me as I don’t plan on using a subwoofer). I also prefer the way they look. I’m going to order the NAD C 316BEE today and then probably ask Dave at Ascend a few more questions before pulling the trigger on one of his speakers.

Thanks for the input, fellas.

Ok, now back to the LS50w!

 

Hi guys, i'm facing the same dilemma as the OP. I was given a quotation for a pair of passive LS50s, a Hegel Rost amp, a Rel t7 sub and a project debut turntable with an analog phono box (5.5k in total). I have auditioned the system and it sounded phenomenal. However, a pair of ls50ws will cost significantly less as it leaves out of the equation the amp and as many of the users claim they sound better than most of the wired ls50 systems. I like the idea of having analog options but what about the speakers actually sounding better in their wireless edition in a cheaper setup?

 

Caveat emptor - I don’t own a turntable. Even though I’m sure I wouldn’t be able to hear the LS50w digitizing a record and then converting it back it analog, it would definitely bug me to know that I no longer had a purely analog signal chain. If that doesn’t bother you, than the LS50w seems like the better buy.

I’ll also add this: I was considering the LS50w or LS50 passive but ended up buying the Ascend Acoustics Sierra-2 for $1,500. I’m driving them with an NAD C 316 BEE, and they get very loud in my 12x12x9 room. This combo for just over $1,900 is a steal in my opinion.

 

An internal speaker amp could not possibly compete with a high-end separate amp. And, a tube amp trumps all solid-state.

 

Another caveat - I have not heard either version of the LS50, but what ultimately steered me away from them was their lack of bass response. A subwoofer is not in the cards for me right now - not in the budget, and I live in an apartment.

Lots of folks say the LS50 has satisfying bass response, but measurements don’t lie. A -3dB point of 79Hz was not going to cut it for me. The Sierras go down to the low to mid 40s depending on the room.

 

That may be, but $3k better? For me and my budget, no. For another person with a different budget, quite possibly.

Although if I had $5.5k to spend on a system, I would probably be spending more than $1.5k on passive speakers anyway.

 

$5.5K??????
My tube amp is a $150 Allied 333. I did update all coupling caps to paper in oil & installed best sounding tubes plus upgraded the power supply. The receiver is stunning sounding and I rebuilt & upgraded over 100 Fisher amps & receivers.

 

The person I was responding to (Iraklis - just a few posts above), which I assumed you were also responding to, was comparing the LS50w with a system costing $5.5k which included the LS50 passives. That’s the reason I used that number.

My mistake if you were just adding your 2 cents to the thread as a whole.

 

If you haven't heard the LS50 then the 79Hz–28kHz, ±3dB can be a bit misleading. For a 5" driver, it produces pretty good bass but obviously limited just as a 6" driver is as well.

 

Hi Ed and thank you for the response. Mind you the budget of $5,5 also includes a turntable, a phono box and a subwoofer all for a cost of $2k. The above will be included in the system regardless of the chosen speakers

 

I agree totally. They do need a good amount of power to shine though. But adding a fast, musical sub is a noticeable improvement to an already amazing speaker.

 

If a sub is included then this point is moot, but I don't see how a frequency response measurement can be misleading. We're talking about physics and scientific measurements - quantitative data. I'm sure that the bass from the LS50 sounds good on it's own for what it is, but if it were compared to a speaker with bass going down more than 30Hz lower, I would think the shortcomings in the LS50's bass response would become apparent. Obviously room size and speaker placement will have an affect too, but all else being equal, a speaker with a bass extension of ±3dB at 79Hz cannot physically compete with a speaker that has a bass extension of ±3dB at 46Hz. Please realize I'm not trying to be brash here; just expressing my thought process.

I'm sure the LS50 is a wonderful speaker based on what I've read about it, but I just would not consider using them without a subwoofer.

 

Ah ha. In that case, I would go with the separates. My other concern when considering the LS50w was the 1 year warranty on the active parts of the speaker. That makes me nervous considering the whole $2,200 package relies on the active parts working correctly.

Good luck! Sounds like either way you're going to have a wonderful sounding system!

 

I would never make a decision based solely on a manufactures stated freq response. Listening to speakers is critical especially when comparing mulitple speakers. The stated frequency response doesn't always accurately tell the whole story so keep that in mind. Also for what it's worth given room size and desired listening level, the LS50s can be quite satisfying without a sub.

 

I have my LS50W’s on a stand in a 17x12 room with carpet. Bass response is satisfying to me. Hope this helps.

 

I was very interested in your comments comparing passive and wireless because they seem to diverge from some other opinions. I have the passive LS50 and think they sound really good paired with a Vincent hybrid amp and a Schiit dac. I was thinking about adding a Mini-DSP for sub integration, EQ and room correction. My other thought was to just simplify and sell what I have to get the LS50w. I don't care so much about the increased bass response of the wireless because I use them in a small room and the bass response of the passive version seems adequate. I'm mainly interested in clarity, transparency, and soundstage, Is the difference still really very subtle in your view between passive and wireless? So many people say the wireless sound dramatically better but you seem to disagree, except as to bass response. I'd hate to buy the wireless version and say "that's it?" versus what I already have. Thoughts?

 

My thoughts are that I auditioned these and B&W's new 707 S2 late last week...and I far preferred the sound of the B&W speaker. The KEF had better imaging, but surprisingly not that much better. The B&W had an obviously-superior high end, without the annoying tinny ringing tweeter of the CM model it replaced. It also seems to have a much smoother frequency response, without the KEF's odd colorations.

The superior imaging of the LS50s just isn't enough to overcome the obvious limitations I hear. YMMV.

A couple of oddities about the B&Ws - they require a ton of power and an amp that can drive 4 ohm loads. Unusual for a speaker this small. And they definitely sound better at higher volumes. At background music levels the KEF's superior imaging is more noticeable than their wonky response and pinched sound, so they end up sounding arguably better. But cranked they drove me nuts, whereas the 707 S2 sounded fantastic and only really started to struggle at fairly crazy high levels.

I need to audition other small speakers in this general price class though, like from Monitor Audio and Wharfdale. I listened to some of Elac's bookshelf speakers while I was in Germany a few months back, including one of their Uni-Fi's, and I wasn't impressed. Similar issue as the KEF LS-50 - pinched and with a wonky frequency response - plus a curiously-muted high end.

 

I'd disagree.

An amp matched to each driver, active crossover and orders of magnitude less distortion? I know what I'd have.