KEF - best of their history?

[Bobbyhifi]

The current Q floorstanders look fantastic and I'd like to have a listen someday. But that 'aggressive'-looking tangerine-shaped clawed metal tweeter scares me...

Don't worry, the UniQ has changed a few times since then, and the new one is massively different. Yes, the high level of detail is still there, but they're much sweeter now, and far less 'aggressive'. The main reason for their perceived aggressiveness was that they generally had a lean sounding bass, which brings the midrange and treble forward more. This balance has now changed, so much so that I don't recall anyone who has ever heard them instore not liking them. The Q and the R are really quite different, and are a major step forward for KEF, and for UniQ.

Are you the marketing man for KEF?

I recently auditioned a few sets of speakers when looking for home cinema system to replace my old Sony all-in-one job and did try the small KEF Q's, I think it was the 100? I found them a little bright and brittle sounding, maybe that's just me though. I didn't try the bigger ones as they were both too expensive as a package and a little large for my living room. After the Sony system I wanted something proper rather than lifestyle so didn't look at their T-series. I remember hearing the older Q series, this was a long time back, maybe late 90's and I quite liked them.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Are you the marketing man for KEF?

I wish - I just know a lot about them

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

Are you the marketing man for KEF?

I wish - I just know a lot about them

David is just passing on the info you would get in store. He is a knowledgeable dealer - a rare breed these days.

 

[BenLaw]

The current Q floorstanders look fantastic and I'd like to have a listen someday. But that 'aggressive'-looking tangerine-shaped clawed metal tweeter scares me...

Don't worry, the UniQ has changed a few times since then, and the new one is massively different. Yes, the high level of detail is still there, but they're much sweeter now, and far less 'aggressive'. The main reason for their perceived aggressiveness was that they generally had a lean sounding bass, which brings the midrange and treble forward more. This balance has now changed, so much so that I don't recall anyone who has ever heard them instore not liking them. The Q and the R are really quite different, and are a major step forward for KEF, and for UniQ.

SSM said that the tweeter looked aggressive, not that the sound could be described as aggressive.

 

[bemaniac]

I know these are brilliant but seriously not reliable the Q series uni-q driver. I returned one for the glue failing on the inside of the driver causing damage to the cone and the other one had a tweeter blown from moderate under 12 o clock volume on an incredibly low distortion amp. One of my q500s is still at the shop and I'm changing the amp to an onkyo tx8050 tomorrow.

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

I know these are brilliant but seriously not reliable the Q series uni-q driver. I returned one for the glue failing on the inside of the driver causing damage to the cone and the other one had a tweeter blown from moderate under 12 o clock volume on an incredibly low distortion amp. One of my q500s is still at the shop and I'm changing the amp to an onkyo tx8050 tomorrow.

You have clearly not had the best experience but one or two failures does not make something un-reliable. Drive unit failure across all of our brands past and present is tiny - KEF included. With the exception of the Mission 78 series of old I cannot recall any issues that were related to manufacture. I am sure your speaker will be replaced or fixed and you will have years of trouble free listening.

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

Double post

 

[Timbot]

I haven't got much experience with KEF other than my pair of Q35.2 in dark apple which I got in about 2001. WHF 5 star I think... Still sound (and look) pretty good to me!

 

[Crocodile]

I was referring to the continuous promotion, not the lack of political ambition.

What, like the KEF ads at the beginning of the WHFS&V 2011 Awards videos?

If we're going to cast aspersions on David's posts because he works for a Kef dealer, should we likewise question the award for Stereo Speaker Product of the Year due to the level of Kef advertising?

For the record, I've had a couple of e-mail discussions with David over concerns with my MA RS6. Not once has he tried to sell me anything, let alone Kef.

 

[chebby]

I haven't got much experience with KEF other than my pair of Q35.2 in dark apple which I got in about 2001. WHF 5 star I think... Still sound (and look) pretty good to me!

I had a pair of these for 11 years from 1996 until 2007. (With a bright blue Rega Planar 3, Goldring 1042, Rega amp, Yamaha KX-580SE cassette deck and Rega Radio tuner.)

They are still in use at a friend's place on the end of an Arcam A65 and PS3 system.

 

[chebby]

I haven't got much experience with KEF other than my pair of Q35.2 in dark apple which I got in about 2001. WHF 5 star I think... Still sound (and look) pretty good to me!

I had a pair of these for 11 years from 1996 until 2007. (With a bright blue Rega Planar 3, Goldring 1042, Rega amp, Yamaha KX-580SE cassette deck and Rega Radio tuner.)

They are still in use at a friend's place on the end of an Arcam A65 and PS3 system.

 

[Andrew Everard]

What, like the KEF ads at the beginning of the WHFS&V 2011 Awards videos?

I was as surprised as you at the inclusion of that pre-roll on every one of the Awards videos

should we likewise question the award for Stereo Speaker Product of the Year due to the level of Kef advertising?

No, because that's a ridiculous point, and one we have addressed many times before on this site.

 

[AEJim]

What, like the KEF ads at the beginning of the WHFS&V 2011 Awards videos?

I was as surprised as you at the inclusion of that pre-roll on every one of the Awards videos

should we likewise question the award for Stereo Speaker Product of the Year due to the level of Kef advertising?

No, because that's a ridiculous point, and one we have addressed many times before on this site.

In fairness to WHF, I've found the review staff and advertising staff barely seem to even know each other let alone conspire to any underhand behaviour. We (AE) won a string of awards in the early 2000's over a period where we weren't even advertising with the magazine.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I don't think Crocodile meant it seriously, it was more of a "well if we do that, then do we do this?" sort of thing.

 

[John Duncan]

In fairness to WHF, I've found the review staff and advertising staff barely seem to even know each other let alone conspire to any underhand behaviour. We (AE) won a string of awards in the early 2000's over a period where we weren't even advertising with the magazine.

And in fairness to them also, I've seen at first hand how - no matter how much they beg - the advertising staff don't have a clue what the reviews say beforehand...:-D

 

[Crocodile]

No, because that's a ridiculous point, and one we have addressed many times before on this site.

No more ridiculous than yours, you can't have it both ways.

If there is indeed (as I would hope) no correlation between Kef winning an award & those voting for the award having their salaries partly funded by Kef's advertising, then it would seem somewhat disingenuous to hint that David's contributions to the forums are any less valid using the same criteria.

 

[Andrew Everard]

No more ridiculous than yours, you can't have it both ways.

If there is indeed (as I would hope) no correlation between Kef winning an award & those voting for the award having their salaries partly funded by Kef's advertising, then it would seem somewhat disingenuous to hint that David's contributions to the forums are any less valid using the same criteria.

Y'see, David, he was serious.

But to answer our snappy friend's point, we have no interest in selling KEF products, or indeed those of any other company, to anyone, and what our advertising department chooses to do is its own concern, given that it has no bearing whatsoever on the editorial content of the site, magazine or Awards.

Our salaries are funded by magazine sales as well as the advertising sold in the magazine, and none of the editorial staff has any awareness of how much any company spends on advertising with the magazine, let alone being in any way influenced by such figures.

Advertising in the magazine is sold on the circulation and reach of the magazine, not on the basis of good reviews, nor on expectation of procuring same.

Indeed, were you to put a gun to my head and demand that right now I told you which company was advertising on the back cover of the Awards issue – which I don't have to hand at the moment – or to name WHFSV's current advertising sales team, I am afraid I would disappoint on both counts. They do their thing, and we do ours, and my lack of knowledge of what goes on in our advertising department, which is (I think) two floors away from the editorial office is something about which I am perfectly happy, maybe even proud.

Whereas David, working for one of the leading KEF dealers in the country, has rather more of an interest in keeping that company's name front and centre, along with those other brands his employer's shop sells. But that's what he's paid to do: sell things, which in itself is of course no bad thing.

Anyway, I think we are now sufficiently far off track for this thread to have run its course.