If I was starting again...

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Visit site
I have just come back home having spent a very pleasurable morning at Lyric Hifi. I was picking up my Arcam remote, which they had kindly fixed after it simply died. It turned out to be a bad connection at the battery.

Anyway, I was no sooner through the door, when Michael said, "My new Kef Reference 3s are now in and connected up. They are in Copper Black Aluminium, which is one of the Kent Engineering and Foundry special additions....and they are stunning". Well, indeed they were. Then he said, "Would you like to hear them?" "Is the Pope Catholic", I replied

A picture doesn't really do them justice:

KefReference3Speakers.jpg


So what was the rest of the system? It consisted of the following:

Linn Akurate DS + Arcam A49 + Ref 3s

After the obligitory coffee from next door, the listening began.

We played a series of tracks, including Nitin Sawhney's Nadia.

What I heard had very strong echos of the Blade. A beautifully judged, sweet treble with incredible detail; a totally accurate, natural mid range; and unfeasibly deep bass (for the size of the two 6.5" Woofers), which remained tight and controlled.

I didn't think the Amp was quite as good as the 35i, but the Akurate DS is a good step up from the Majik DS; and I believed the New Refs to be better. As a complete system, it sounded like an improvement...even though it was much the same price, as the full list cost of what I had.

As luck would have it, he had a pair of 203/2s kicking about, so we put them into the same system for comparison. I knew they would have less impressive bass, but I was really wanting to hear the differences in the new Uni-Q driver array. Personally, and probably selfishly, I was hoping that the gap between the two Reference models wouldn't be that wide.

From almost the first note played through the 203/2s, it became quite apparent, just what a difference these improvements have made and how far the new Refs have come.

On the 203/2s, the soundstage shrank a little; the treble was more forward, less natural and surprisingly, less detailed. On their own, these older Refs gave a very good account of themselves, and after a while, I was lulled by their familiarity into thinking that maybe the differences weren't so big after all.

After half an hour or so, we swapped back.....and then, if anything, the differences were even more stark. The Ref 3s are just so balanced from top to bottom. The detail is staggering, but their neatest trick is how impressively they simply get out of the way of the music, to the point where they almost disappear. I put this down to the very natural soundfield you get with a "single source" Treble/Mid and the equally natural tone they produce.

Compared to the 205/2s, I think the Bass is much more comparible, but the Ref 3s have a bass that is a bit more powerful and digs even deeper.

A quick mention needs to be made for the Arcam A49. What a good sounding Amp this is and in my view, represents remarkable value for money at its price point. The fact that I liked it so much shows how effective the Class G is, in giving that Class A sound.

The New Refs have come of age.....and I want some......but I will have to wait until I have the requisite finances again.....by which time their will probably be a new model out!
 

jjbomber

Well-known member
Kent Engineering and Foundry were the previous occupants of the building. Ray Cooke had nothing to do with them, other than renting from them. KEF is not short for Kent Engineering and Foundry, though that inspired his company name.

I still have my Reference speakers, my pride and joy.
 

Reijer

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2014
18
0
18,520
Visit site
Nice speakers indeed, Cno.

I've heard the Ref 1 and the Ref 5, the latter used in an live performance. They were stunning. In Holland they used the Hegel pre and post amplification or the H160 for the Ref 3.

Very nice single also, sounded nice on the B&W also but nowehere near the KEF's I think.....
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Visit site
Reijer said:
Nice speakers indeed, Cno.

I've heard the Ref 1 and the Ref 5, the latter used in an live performance. They were stunning. In Holland they used the Hegel pre and post amplification or the H160 for the Ref 3.

Very nice single also, sounded nice on the B&W also but nowehere near the KEF's I think.....

From what I've heard about Hegel, I can imagine how well it would have sounded.

Getting close to the performance of the Blades was no easy task, but these are much more than a poor relative.

If the R700s had been available when I bought my Refs, I would probably have gone for them, due to VFM and diminishing returns.

IMO. Kef have now reinstated the gap and I would now go for the New Refs over the R Series, if I had the budget.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Visit site
jjbomber said:
Kent Engineering and Foundry were the previous occupants of the building. Ray Cooke had nothing to do with them, other than renting from them. KEF is not short for Kent Engineering and Foundry, though that inspired his company name.

I still have my Reference speakers, my pride and joy.

This is what they say on their website: "The company was founded in 1961 by Raymond Cooke OBE (1925–1995) and was initially headquartered in a Nissen Hut on the premises of Kent Engineering & Foundry (from where the name KEF is derived) "

Is "derived" the same as "inspired"?.....I think it may well be.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Visit site
matt49 said:
Cno, good to hear you're out and about and checking out new kit.

The new Refs do look great. Thanks for the report.

*drinks*

My crafty dealer plays the long game....no hard sell, he just lets you convince yourself. *dash1*

Anyway, it's all academic at the moment.
 

SteveR750

Well-known member
For me the new SCM40 is a better speaker than the Twenty.26, which has that slight upper bass smear that bloights all of the floorstander PMC range. Try playing some Madeleine Peyroux on them, and you'll see what I mean, and that was with the new superclean supernait 2.

I still reckon that aboove 250Hz the ATCs will really push those R3s. Admittedly, I'm sure the latter go lower flatter, but as sweet..? Send a pair to Colin and we'll soon find out!
 

matthewpiano

Well-known member
CnoEvil said:
matthewpiano said:
...until I heard the PMC Twenty 26 a few weeks later.

What system were they on they on the end of....the same one?
Same turntable and phono stage but Naim pre/power. Overall though the PMCs sounded more natural and involving than the KEFs to my ears, despite being powered by Naim amps which I usually can't get on with.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Visit site
SteveR750 said:
For me the new SCM40 is a better speaker than the Twenty.26, which has that slight upper bass smear that bloights all of the floorstander PMC range. Try playing some Madeleine Peyroux on them, and you'll see what I mean, and that was with the new superclean supernait 2.

I still reckon that aboove 250Hz the ATCs will really push those R3s. Admittedly, I'm sure the latter go lower flatter, but as sweet..? Send a pair to Colin and we'll soon find out!

My 205/2s are really good speakers and used to be as good as any in their price range.....the New Refs have raised the bar quite significantly, by making them now sound ordinary....which they are not. I was surprised.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Visit site
matthewpiano said:
CnoEvil said:
matthewpiano said:
...until I heard the PMC Twenty 26 a few weeks later.

What system were they on they on the end of....the same one?
Same turntable and phono stage but Naim pre/power. Overall though the PMCs sounded more natural and involving than the KEFs to my ears, despite being powered by Naim amps which I usually can't get on with.

When I heard the previous Refs along with the top Rega CDP/Amp, I didn't like the result....sounded uninvolving.

I suspect the ADS may be significantly better as a Source, which could also explain what I heard. today.
 

JamesMellor

New member
Jul 19, 2013
40
0
0
Visit site
Hi Cno ,

This system is 15k , but you mention the R700's at 2k we can add an amp at 2k and AEX / Blu ray player / Mac mini / pods/pads , 1k at most . If you where really starting again knowing what you know a 5K system or a 15k system ?

James
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
14
0
Visit site
JamesMellor said:
Hi Cno ,

This system is 15k , but you mention the R700's at 2k we can add an amp at 2k and AEX / Blu ray player / Mac mini / pods/pads , 1k at most . If you where really starting again knowing what you know a 5K system or a 15k system ?

James

It is very personal as to what one is prepared to pay for the additional improvement. I have been lucky enough to have lived with and heard what the extra money can get you. I find it very hard to go backwards.

In my personal view, I think that the A49 is good enough to make you seriously consider whether you would pay the full cost of the AMS35i (luckily I got a substantial discount), if it was still available.

I would almost certainly have bought the R700s vs the 205/s, on a VFM basis. What I heard from the New Refs has restored the balance (imo).....but it is about what you are prepared to spend. I've heard the Blades, and this is where a spare £20k would go. *dash1*
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts