cheap vs more expensive speakers

[gasolin]

So i wanted to upgrade my q acoustics 3010i's

Kef LS 50 Meta in blue, i forgot to read more of the review from asr, all though they are the reference in it's price range 1000 pound or 1200 euros, more or less nobody mentions it besides asr, they have alot of distortion in the bass and are not for loud music, lets say up to 100db, even when they rate the max spl for a pair to 106db

KEF LS50 Meta Review (Speaker)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the KEF LS50 Meta bookshelf coaxial speaker. It was kindly purchased new by a member and drop shipped to me and costs US $1,500 for a pair. The LS50 Meta comes in different colors and I must say, it looks stunning in white: You could sell it as...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Super soundstage and depth, a little sparkle in the upper midrange (which isn't to bad), i could ask for better bass (less distortion) and better power handling, sort of cleaner sounding in the bass,when playing more than 80 db in average spl.

My q acoustics 3010i are small (but deep in size) speakers but somehow manged to sound of more in the bass (not less) and sounds as if they play loud better

Do we often get dissapointed if speakers 3-4 or 5 times the price the speakers they are gonna replace isn't perfect (beside the max spl and bass limitations when it's bookshelf speakers).

Cheap speakers can sound good, we might except more flaws from cheap speakers since we don't expect them to sound as good as more expensive speakers.

We might expect more expensive speakers to sound really good but often get a little dissapointed if they don't, just beacuse they are alot more expensive than the speakers they replace, doesn't mean they are perfect,alot better, even a very modest inperfection could be dissapointing relative to some cheaper speakers that are almost perfect for most people

Like if i upgrade my almost perfect sounding speaker to something 3 times as expensive, i should get a perfect (much better) sound, thats just fare from the reality

Im not asking for alternatives to kef ls 50 meta, more oppinions on the distortion,bass and if we often get dissapointed if much more expensive speakers don't sounds alot better than the cheaper speakers they replace

Im having a little hard time imagine keeping the metas since the combination of the bass and spl isn't perfect and they are not cheap (good clarity and super soundtage, depth)

My q acoustics is not the most loud playing speaker and don't have the clearity,soundstage,depth in the midrange as the metas but sound like the play loud a little better and somehow have more bass at normal levels, i think it might be easier to except the flaws do the low price and the fact that they sound good

What do you think?

 

[RoA]

If you prefer the cheaper speakers, keep them. You are happy, your wallet is happy.

Simples.

The LS50 are also a little finicky re. amplification. I don't know what you are using but it obviously matches better with your QAcoustics.

I had the Wireless Metas and enjoyed them. However, I tend to listen at more modest volumes. Still, with their built in powerful amplifiers and DSP they had quite impressive, subjectively deep and delineated bass for their tiny size. - This was followed by active Formation Duo's. They had much more bass and perceived power but lost out in other aspects. - I have since gone back to passive/separate amplifier/s.

 

[rainsoothe]

So i wanted to upgrade my q acoustics 3010i's

Kef LS 50 Meta in blue, i forgot to read more of the review from asr, all though they are the reference in it's price range 1000 pound or 1200 euros, more or less nobody mentions it besides asr, they have alot of distortion in the bass and are not for loud music, lets say up to 100db, even when they rate the max spl for a pair to 106db

KEF LS50 Meta Review (Speaker)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the KEF LS50 Meta bookshelf coaxial speaker. It was kindly purchased new by a member and drop shipped to me and costs US $1,500 for a pair. The LS50 Meta comes in different colors and I must say, it looks stunning in white: You could sell it as...

www.audiosciencereview.com

View attachment 3016


Super soundstage and depth, a little sparkle in the upper midrange (which isn't to bad), i could ask for better bass (less distortion) and better power handling, sort of cleaner sounding in the bass,when playing more than 80 db in average spl.

My q acoustics 3010i are small (but deep in size) speakers but somehow manged to sound of more in the bass (not less) and sounds as if they play loud better

Do we often get dissapointed if speakers 3-4 or 5 times the price the speakers they are gonna replace isn't perfect (beside the max spl and bass limitations when it's bookshelf speakers).

Cheap speakers can sound good, we might except more flaws from cheap speakers since we don't expect them to sound as good as more expensive speakers.

We might expect more expensive speakers to sound really good but often get a little dissapointed if they don't, just beacuse they are alot more expensive than the speakers they replace, doesn't mean they are perfect,alot better, even a very modest inperfection could be dissapointing relative to some cheaper speakers that are almost perfect for most people

Like if i upgrade my almost perfect sounding speaker to something 3 times as expensive, i should get a perfect (much better) sound, thats just fare from the reality

Im not asking for alternatives to kef ls 50 meta, more oppinions on the distortion,bass and if we often get dissapointed if much more expensive speakers don't sounds alot better than the cheaper speakers they replace

Im having a little hard time imagine keeping the metas since the combination of the bass and spl isn't perfect and they are not cheap (good clarity and super soundtage, depth)

My q acoustics is not the most loud playing speaker and don't have the clearity,soundstage,depth in the midrange as the metas but sound like the play loud a little better and somehow have more bass at normal levels, i think it might be easier to except the flaws do the low price and the fact that they sound good

What do you think?

I think you're very easily swayed by the stuff you read on ASR and should stop looking at the graphs and just try to listen in order to determine what brings YOU the most musical enjoyment.

Also, as @RoA already said, the Metas are demanding on amplification, and you're using a studio power amp - let's say this might be ok - and a cheap Behringer mixer (of all brands!!) as a preamp, which is a big no-no in my book. In my experience, the preamp plays a much bigger role in shaping the sound than the power amp. The difference between my 172 pre or a Nac 202 and a Nac 282 is enormous, used with the same power amp. So it might just be the case that your Q Acoustics are actually masking what's upstream from them, and the more revealing Metas are exposing what's upstream, and a more appropriate amplification and source might get way more out of them. I think you should stop following advice from people who tell you to throw all your budget at speakers and just get something that "works" upstream.

For the record, I'm not saying the Metas will be to your liking, I haven't heard them and I'm not a huge fan of Kef speakers in general, but they're defo underperforming because of the rest of your setup. Throw a Naim XS or Arcam A20 or probably even a Rega Brio at them, and the storry might change.

 

[12th Monkey]

I think you're very easily swayed by the stuff you read on ASR and should stop looking at the graphs and just try to listen in order to determine what brings YOU the most musical enjoyment.

Agreed. I've never looked at charts for anything I have ever bought.

An increase in budget won't necessarily bring you a sound you prefer (particularly if the characteristics you enjoy are actually based upon inaccuracy in reproduction), but if you choose carefully it should do more often than not.

 

[daytona600]

Next time you’re at a gig, take note of the snare drum and high hat. Close your eyes and ask yourself: “if that was a loudspeaker, would I say it was warm?”. The answer is almost certainly, “no”. Real life never sounds “warm”, because it is accurate. Some may even say that it’s “harsh” or “bright”

 

[plastic penguin]

Can't really add much to what the others have said. In the main, the better the speaker you need to feed it a better signal

 

[davidf]

My q acoustics 3010i are small (but deep in size) speakers but somehow manged to sound of more in the bass (not less) and sounds as if they play loud better

A bigger cabinet volume helps deep bass. I can’t recall seeing a cutaway for the Meta, but the original LS50 really didn’t have a lot of cabinet volume, as it was braced to Hell and back - I don’t think some people realise just how small the cabinet volume is.

Do we often get dissapointed if speakers 3-4 or 5 times the price the speakers they are gonna replace isn't perfect (beside the max spl and bass limitations when it's bookshelf speakers).

No speaker is perfect. All speakers are a juggling act of many positives and negatives, especially true for the LS50. As you pay more, you generally have more of the negatives eliminated or greatly diminished. With speakers, we have to take into account the driver area when assessing what they can do. The LS50 uses a 5.25” mid/bass driver, but the central 2” is the tweeter, so the useable area of the mid/bass driver is more akin to a 4.5” bass driver (random guess). I think this is one aspect as to why they can’t go as loud as other 5.25” equipped loudspeakers, but obviously what you do get is a reduction in issues you’ll get in almost any other loudspeaker, like phase issues between the two drivers, which are essentially eliminated with UniQ.

Cheap speakers can sound good, we might except more flaws from cheap speakers since we don't expect them to sound as good as more expensive speakers.

Budget speakers can sound far better than most people give them credit for. Many people tend to upgrade their speakers first when wanting an upgrade, partly because they think they make more difference - which is untrue - it’s just that the difference is more easily noticeable when changing speakers. More often than not though, they may be changing speakers in a system that is quite well balanced between amplifier and speaker, and going for a more expensive speaker (which is usually more demanding on the amplifier) which their existing amplifier can’t drive or control properly. Initially they don’t notice because they’ve got a new toy, but once that wears off, they end up with a feeling of unhappiness with the system because it doesn’t sound right - they’re then back on the upgrade wagon.

We might expect more expensive speakers to sound really good but often get a little dissapointed if they don't, just beacuse they are alot more expensive than the speakers they replace, doesn't mean they are perfect,alot better, even a very modest inperfection could be dissapointing relative to some cheaper speakers that are almost perfect for most people

As above. When upgrading a speaker, the capabilities of the existing amplifier with regards to the new speakers is usually overlooked.

Like if i upgrade my almost perfect sounding speaker to something 3 times as expensive, i should get a perfect (much better) sound, thats just fare from the reality

As previously mentioned, loudspeakers are a balance act in compromises. Plus, you’d have to define “perfection”, as that would have a different meaning for different people. Yes, spending three times as much should be much better, but whether the superiority of the better loudspeaker can be experienced will depend on the partnering amplifier and the room they’re placed in. Some speakers just don’t work in some rooms, no matter what you do to try and make them work. It’s quite easy to get the right budget speaker to work well in a room and grow any random, more expensive speaker in and get bad results.

Im not asking for alternatives to kef ls 50 meta, more oppinions on the distortion,bass and if we often get dissapointed if much more expensive speakers don't sounds alot better than the cheaper speakers they replace

A home demo should always be an option. I say to everyone who comes to see me, that hearing any speakers at my place is fine, it gives you a taster of what they’re about, and you can compare in the same place, but it tells you nothing about how well they will work in your space. I would hope that most people who upgrade their speakers will have listened to them beforehand, and tried them at home before committing to them.

Im having a little hard time imagine keeping the metas since the combination of the bass and spl isn't perfect and they are not cheap (good clarity and super soundtage, depth)

And this is exactly the sort of thing that ASR plants in the mind - if you hadn’t read their measurements (presuming they’re correct), would you be in the same frame of mind now? Would you have picked up on that had you not read their measurements? Would you now be enjoying them? When ASR pick up on a measurements they’re not happy with - and they will compare ANY and EVERY product to the very best measuring product, regardless of price. The LS50s shouldn’t be purchased for high output, or for large rooms (without a subwoofer or two), so under normal circumstances, I doubt anyone would reach their max output. I’ve used LS50s at home for music and movies, and under normal listening levels (not Reference Level, obviously, as most people don’t) I’ve never had any issues. Would their measurements make me see the LS50 any differently? No, I’d happily have them again for home theatre.

My q acoustics is not the most loud playing speaker and don't have the clearity,soundstage,depth in the midrange as the metas but sound like the play loud a little better and somehow have more bass at normal levels, i think it might be easier to except the flaws do the low price and the fact that they sound good

If the LS50s are struggling to reach the output you need, hen you need a larger loudspeaker wih greater output. If they’re not struggling to reach your listening level, then you’re giving too much thought to ASR‘s measurements. Don’t forget this is a forum where if one product has a measured distortion of 0.01%, and another 0.001%, the latter product is, without question, the better sounding product, even if it is a tenth of the price of the former product, and despite whether that difference is audible or not. They don’t listen, they measure, and purchase based on measured performance. Great if that’s what pure after, but as many know, as important as measurements are, they don’t tell the whole story - listening can make a mockery of measurements, and probably vice versa. At the end of the day, a product can measure extremely well, maybe even the best in its class, but it doesn’t guarantee whether you’re going to like the sound of it.

I bet you’ll never see that forum introduce a listening session first with first impressions, and THEN measurements afterwards to see how measurements and listening correlate...

 

[gasolin]

Well i think my amp is very good, fare from low powered class d amps that has alot of distortion at high frequencys, a very good bass, plenty of it + power.


Have nothing against my mixer, monitor controller, it's good, yes it's got extras i don't need but a preamp for that kind of money is hard to find used as well as new (look at thomann reviews).

I for shure got biased towards the distortion in the bass and that it's rather limited in spl, not so much max spl, but a rather limited spl before it starts to distort in the bass, thats why so many talk about adding a couple of subs at 120-150hz over at asr.

From the review
Was it all perfect? No. As I turned up bass heavy track, the low bass notes change their tonality and quickly become distorted. Notch the volume even higher and you are greeted with scary crackle. You can visually see this in the driver. It separates from the tweeter which is kind of disconcerting but that is how the coaxial driver works. By the time you see any significant separation/movement of the woofer, the bass starts to change. Push it to move more and you are in distortion territory. The driver is simply too small/lacks the excursion for high dynamic range.


I have had low budget speakers for many years now and wanted to go atleast 2 steps up, more details,more clarity (without sacrificing listening fatigue), mabye a litlle more spl and bass

If bass and spl is about the same as now i wouldn't mind, as long as the quality is better, a little sparkle i the upper midrange and combination of bass,spl,distortion makes the meta's a little lesss than perfect for me (don't mind the sparkle so much).

I don't want the speakers to be limited in the bass,spl department, meaning distortion and spl when within there max spl, if i wnat alot of it i just have to buy bigger speakers (so fare peaking at 100 db and less than 10 times out of 100 above 100db is fine for my needs)

 

[CheshirePete]

ASR is a great site although it is very measurement focused. That is fine but I need to actually hear the speakers. I have Dirac and I can tell you that a flat frequency response sucks all the life out of the speaker. I had the LS50's for a year and they certainly weren't an all rounder, which is what I am looking for.

There is no replacement for displacement.

 

[davidf]

I for shure got biased towards the distortion in the bass and that it's rather limited in spl, not so much max spl, but a rather limited spl before it starts to distort in the bass, thats why so many talk about adding a couple of subs at 120-150hz over at asr.

From the review
Was it all perfect? No. As I turned up bass heavy track, the low bass notes change their tonality and quickly become distorted. Notch the volume even higher and you are greeted with scary crackle. You can visually see this in the driver. It separates from the tweeter which is kind of disconcerting but that is how the coaxial driver works. By the time you see any significant separation/movement of the woofer, the bass starts to change. Push it to move more and you are in distortion territory. The driver is simply too small/lacks the excursion for high dynamic range.

Another thing that forum tends to ignore is the real world useage of some of the equipment they measure. Turning up LS50s so loud that they heavily distort is far from real world useage - anyone wanting that sort of level really wouldn’t be looking at the LS50 in the first place - they’d look more towards the R3 for greater output. It isn’t rocket science, but they treat everything the same, regardless.

While the LS50 is nicely balanced across the range, they’re not for bass monsters. Anyone wanting the most bass at this price point will be looking at floorstanders, but obviously at the same price, you won’t be getting what the LS50s are capable of in the the mid/treble with that UniQ driver. The LS50 is for people who need something small but high performance. I’ve always referred to them as “mini Reference”, such is their capabilities, but obviously Reference at this price point has to come with some compromises, as you’re not going to get £7k’s worth of Reference One performance at £1200.

Visiting a good dealer should ensure the LS50s are purchased for the right situations, and I’m convinced people who audition first rarely make the mistake of incorrectly buying LS50s. It’s the people who buy blind on the internet after reading good reviews and end user opinions that are usually disappointed, when they put them on the end of their Marantz PM6006 in a 6m x 8m room and expect club levels of output and bass.

Choosing the loudspeaker to suit the room is key.

 

[gasolin]

#7

The LS50 uses a 5.25” mid/bass driver, but the central 2” is the tweeter, so the useable area of the mid/bass driver is more akin to a 4.5” bass driver (random guess)

That's one of the reasons why many at asr talk about getting a subwoofer (or 2), have had small speakers with good bass

Plus, you’d have to define “perfection”

A sound where theres not to much highs or to little bass, some want it loud, some what it deep and some want both, get's pleanty loud for even half deaf 60+ people who play rock music, heavy metal and does nothing wrong even when they don't sound as good as real high end speakers. My 3010's doesn't have as good soundstage af the meats but it doesn nothing wrong (soundstage) the metas are just better

Kef meta whathifi against Nothing at this price, for me they have distortion and don't go loud enough before you hear there spl,bass limits (not thinking about how deep the bass is but more the quality of the bass playing loud, lets just pick a round number 100db peak)

Q acoustics 3010i whathifi against Lack the scale and dynamic reach of some (larger) rivals , don't find that a problem for me + the upper midrange sounds a little soft (which helps to avoid sharpness,fatigue when playing loud), i won't even say max spl and bass is a limit,cons since they do get pleanty loud without sounding stressed and the bass is pretty good,deep and punchy, far from thin when playing the good songs like songs from Brian Bromberg (blue bossa) that you would expect from a speaker with a 4" woofer

The LS50s shouldn’t be purchased for high output, or for large rooms (without a subwoofer or two), so under normal circumstances, I doubt anyone would reach their max output

Well in a room nearfield 85 db is loud but not if your doeing something else making food in the kitchen or gardening i the back of your garden + 10 db it's strugeling somewhat to play clean

I say to everyone who comes to see me, that hearing any speakers at my place is fine, it gives you a taster of what they’re about, and you can compare in the same place, but it tells you nothing about how well they will work in your space.

You have to listen to the speakers in your home, with the amp,system you have,the acoustics you have, the music you like and how loud you prefer

For a family of 4 + a dog you don't deside if the car is somthing you would like to own by taking it to a race track, right ?

Would you have picked up on that had you not read their measurements?

I did, just didn't notice the distortion before i got them and there rather limited ability to play loud (not mantion anywheer else in the reviews i have read other then on asr), althoughthe rated 106 db for a pair is enough for most people and if i and other people like it loud we would buy big or klipsch or a subwoofer for the ultimate bass


If the LS50s are struggling to reach the output you need, hen you need a larger loudspeaker wih greater output.

My 3010i's sound as if they play louder better than the kef's, pleanty for loud ac/dc, it's not so much max spl but how they play loud.

One car can go really fast but doesn't handle good at high speeds even when it's handling generally is really good, a slower car might handle better and does it at high speed, the slower car could be more fun (better handling) at 100 miles (160 kph) that the faster more expensive car at 125 miles (200 kph) or for that matter 100 miles (160 kph).

it's not about max spl,speed, it's about how it sounds,handles when playing loud, driving at high speed

I bet you’ll never see that forum introduce a listening session first with first impressions, and THEN measurements afterwards to see how measurements and listening correlate...

Some may measure the frequency response and are really fixated on getting a flat frequency response, as if flat is equal to a perfect sound, mabye in a recording studio if the speakers at the same time is super analytic,revealing , not for most people even when 99% of all muic is not flat recorded

 

[gasolin]

Turning up LS50s so loud that they heavily distort is far from real world useage

They just start to do it when they start to get loud

 

[Gray]

Next time you’re at a gig, take note of the snare drum and high hat. Close your eyes and ask yourself: “if that was a loudspeaker, would I say it was warm?”. The answer is almost certainly, “no”. Real life never sounds “warm”, because it is accurate. Some may even say that it’s “harsh” or “bright”

All so true.
If a speaker's higher frequencies are veiled (less than completely neutral) I don't care how good it is in any other respect, it's not for me.
A lot of my music contains hi-hats and I don't want them sounding like they've got a blanket over them.

 

[gasolin]

All so true.
If a speaker's higher frequencies are veiled (less than completely neutral) I don't care how good it is in any other respect, it's not for me.
A lot of my music contains hi-hats and I don't want them sounding like they've got a blanket over them.

Also not as if it sounds as if they try to compensate for people who don't hear the highs so well

Like the app,setting on a phone that can do the same (most iem are bright sounding) called adapt sound

 

[manicm]

Gasolin, it would be illuminating if you'd tell us what amp you're using.

 

[gasolin]

Gasolin, it would be illuminating if you'd tell us what amp you're using.

Can't you se my signature ?

Opinion on IMG Stage line STA-400D amplifier with Hypex modules

Hello everyone. I introduce myself. It is the first time I write. I'm Stefano from Milan, Italy. I have been following this magnificent forum for some time. I found a German manufacturer that produces a very good price amplifier that uses Hypex modules. It's the only amp I've found online that...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[manicm]

No can't see your signature, maybe because I'm on mobile right now. Interesting amp.

 

[manicm]

@david, Danny from the notorious yt channel GR Research very recently made a comment that older style wide floorstanding speakers did not image well compared to modern narrow speakers. Is he spinning yarns? That's the first I've ever heard of that, and I don't recall it from our old system.

 

[Tinman1952]

Next time you’re at a gig, take note of the snare drum and high hat. Close your eyes and ask yourself: “if that was a loudspeaker, would I say it was warm?”. The answer is almost certainly, “no”. Real life never sounds “warm”, because it is accurate. Some may even say that it’s “harsh” or “bright”

I wouldn't say a snare drum or high hat (or any percussive instrument) was a good way of judging musical quality. The attack, sustain and decay of piano notes or a violin are a much better example.

 

[Tinman1952]

@david, Danny from the notorious yt channel GR Research very recently made a comment that older style wide floorstanding speakers did not image well compared to modern narrow speakers. Is he spinning yarns? That's the first I've ever heard of that, and I don't recall it from our old system.

Presumably he is talking about the advantage of a narrow front baffle and the reduced edge diffraction which can affect imaging...

 

[davidf]

@david, Danny from the notorious yt channel GR Research very recently made a comment that older style wide floorstanding speakers did not image well compared to modern narrow speakers. Is he spinning yarns? That's the first I've ever heard of that, and I don't recall it from our old system.

He is correct. Some manufacturers seem to ignore this even with modern designs, but most manufacturers have come away from wider designs, or incorporated features to minimise the negative effects.