Kef ls50 or avi adm9rs or other?

[Phileas]

didn't we settle this quite a while ago?

"We"?

 

[steve_1979]

Better yet go to a pro store and audition some monitors yourself, then you can say whether actives are just better than passives.

+1

Go to a pro audio shop and have a listen to some active speakers yourself so that you can make up your own mind.

 

[steve_1979]

@ the OP: As you can tell by how this thread has gone, only you can determine whether the KEFs or AVIs are right for you. Most people have not heard both and even if they did it would just be their subjective opinions. Clearly both the LS50 & ADM9RS are fine products in their own rights, so you just need to find the one that is right for you.

Re: the overall AVI debate - Even ignoring whether you like the head honcho at the company or not, there are still some issues that cause problems for potential customers:

1) The claim is that the typical passive route is essentially audiophoolery and that buying a pair of AVI actives will break the cycle of upgraditis. That's straight up nonsense - there are many members of the AVI forums who have upgraded from one model of the ADM9 to the next and/or to the ADM40s. So the cycle has not been broken. So rippng on other HiFi companies about their upgrade paths is just hypocricy (especially when AVI customers are not discouraged from buying the whole AVI catalog).

2) The idea that in general actives are more accurate/just better than passives. While actives generally offer great (often better value for money), you only need to visit a pro audio forum or read user reviews on a site that sells pro monitors and you'll quickly see that not all actives are great. Pro users complain about monitors sounding distorted, overly bright, rolled off, bass shy, bass heavy, etc etc etc. Better yet go to a pro store and audition some monitors yourself, then you can say whether actives are just better than passives.

Good post

regards

+1 Well said Ajani

1) I could never see why people think that active speakers cure upgraditis. It's just as easy to upgrade/change an active speaker as it is with any other piece of hifi equipment.

2) I agree that actives generally offer better value for money than passives do. It's also true that there are bad examples of active speakers which are too bright, boomy, bass light or whatever. However, many actives are voiced to have a natural balance and are measurably more accurate than passive speakers - although it's fair to say this style of sound reproduction doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone.

 

[the record spot]

Actives don't necessarily offer better value for money Steve, as I'd suggest this is dependant on what your buying criteria is and each buyer's own definition of value for money...

 

[steve_1979]

Actives don't necessarily offer better value for money Steve, as I'd suggest this is dependant on what your buying criteria is and each buyer's own definition of value for money...

I agree.

Saying that active speakers generally offer better value for money is just my own opinion based on my own experiences. Although there have been a few exceptions to this where I've found that some active speakers were overpriced.

I've also heard some cracking value passive systems that sound great too (such as my own AVI Neutron system which uses passive speakers).

But while there are some exceptions I have generally found that active speakers do offer better value for money than passive speakers (IMO ).

 

[byakuya83]

I don't think it's possible to recommend ADMs on this forum without facing a torrent of abuse and/or the thread deteriorating into the usual active/passive debate. The purpose of a discussion board is defeated as it's not even worth discussing the issue.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Other speakers to consider are the Dynaudio Xeos, which are a more advanced design than AVI being wireless, or the Linn Majik 109s. The Linns have the advantage that you can make them active if you want.

 

[the record spot]

Very true, some of the responsibility for that falls on self-same owners I feel.

 

[drummerman]

Better yet go to a pro store and audition some monitors yourself, then you can say whether actives are just better than passives.

+1

Go to a pro audio shop and have a listen to some active speakers yourself so that you can make up your own mind.

... which I did, though it has to be said that was some time ago. - In less than ideal hifi circumstances (they were all grouped together and controlled from a pro mixer console) one thing shone through, the cheaper units ala KRK etc. generally seemed inferior to the more expensive ones. Adam impressed me (no, not a member of staff though they were very helpful) and the very small Genelec (with rather disproportionate price tags) dissappointed. Most of them also looked rather prosaic and I can't imagine they would grace many a living room. This is where AVI and other 'for home' made actives score in addition to offering some niceties such as remote control and such.

Bear in mind I am not a sound engineer and the whole thing was not just badly set up but also totally subjective in addition to having taken place some time ago. Memory, especially for things like that (recollection of sound), is incapable of recalling things precisely so my observations are probably not worth the screen it is written on! - It was interesting nevertheless.

regards

 

[lecson]

I haven't followed all of this thread as it seems to have descended into the usual bashing. However I own ADMs and like them. And I find the LS50 very interesting.

If I wanted a similarly-sized passive speaker, with a similar, well thought-out engineering basis behind it, I would definitely seek out the LS50. Particularly as good power amps are not hard to find. The LS50 looks a particularly well-balanced design and I'm sure it will be easy to drive - so you can probably get away with a good quality AV receiver and have a terrific system.

My impression from reading about them is that the LS50 has been tuned to be a stand-alone speaker, without the need for a sub unless you wish to dig deep. The ADMs, on the other hand, have sacrificed extension for a cleaner mid-range with the option to add a sub,depending on the type of music you enjoy.

I look forward to reading impressions of anyone who has directly compared both.

 

[Phileas]

deteriorating into the usual active/passive debate.

I didn't start it! :O

 

[CnoEvil]

All things being equal, ADMs will consistantly sound the same.; the LS50s presentation can be made sound different, depending on the amp driving them....whether this is an advantage or a disadvantage is personal.

 

[BenLaw]

I haven't followed all of this thread as it seems to have descended into the usual bashing. However I own ADMs and like them. And I find the LS50 very interesting.

If I wanted a similarly-sized passive speaker, with a similar, well thought-out engineering basis behind it, I would definitely seek out the LS50. Particularly as good power amps are not hard to find. The LS50 looks a particularly well-balanced design and I'm sure it will be easy to drive - so you can probably get away with a good quality AV receiver and have a terrific system

Why are you sure they will be easy to drive? Their sensitivity is 85db and their impedance drops to 3.2ohms. This makes it significantly more difficult to drive than, say, ATC SCM11s.

 

[Ajani]

@ the OP: As you can tell by how this thread has gone, only you can determine whether the KEFs or AVIs are right for you. Most people have not heard both and even if they did it would just be their subjective opinions. Clearly both the LS50 & ADM9RS are fine products in their own rights, so you just need to find the one that is right for you.

Re: the overall AVI debate - Even ignoring whether you like the head honcho at the company or not, there are still some issues that cause problems for potential customers:

1) The claim is that the typical passive route is essentially audiophoolery and that buying a pair of AVI actives will break the cycle of upgraditis. That's straight up nonsense - there are many members of the AVI forums who have upgraded from one model of the ADM9 to the next and/or to the ADM40s. So the cycle has not been broken. So rippng on other HiFi companies about their upgrade paths is just hypocricy (especially when AVI customers are not discouraged from buying the whole AVI catalog).

2) The idea that in general actives are more accurate/just better than passives. While actives generally offer great (often better value for money), you only need to visit a pro audio forum or read user reviews on a site that sells pro monitors and you'll quickly see that not all actives are great. Pro users complain about monitors sounding distorted, overly bright, rolled off, bass shy, bass heavy, etc etc etc. Better yet go to a pro store and audition some monitors yourself, then you can say whether actives are just better than passives.

Good post

regards

+1 Well said Ajani

1) I could never see why people think that active speakers cure upgraditis. It's just as easy to upgrade/change an active speaker as it is with any other piece of hifi equipment.

2) I agree that actives generally offer better value for money than passives do. It's also true that there are bad examples of active speakers which are too bright, boomy, bass light or whatever. However, many actives are voiced to have a natural balance and are measurably more accurate than passive speakers - although it's fair to say this style of sound reproduction doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone.

I should clarify my point: I'm not only refering to bad actives, but differences in user opinions on highly rated brands. Just like how audiophiles will debate whether Monitor Audio, B&W, KEF, Dynaudio etc sound good, bad, boring, neutral, etc etc etc. I see the same kind of debates about the pro audio actives like Genelec, Dynaudio, Mackie, KRK, M-Audio, Focal, Yamaha etc. One person will claim Genelec are the best actives, another will claim that the sound is hyped up to be exciting rather than neutral and hence poor for mixing. I've read pro audio threads asking for the best $1K active monitor, that read the same way such a discussion would go on WHF about the best $1k passive - lots of totally opposite opinions on the sound of each brand and no clear consensus on which brand is the best (or even good).

 

[Phileas]

the LS50s presentation can be made sound different, depending on the amp driving them.

Or the cables?

 

[CnoEvil]

the LS50s presentation can be made sound different, depending on the amp driving them.

Or the cables?

Yup, they might even tip the balance!

 

[Frank Harvey]

Why are you sure they will be easy to drive? Their sensitivity is 85db and their impedance drops to 3.2ohms. This makes it significantly more difficult to drive than, say, ATC SCM11s.

Are we talking on paper, or in practice?

 

[GSB]

the LS50s presentation can be made sound different, depending on the amp driving them.

Or the cables?

Yup, they might even tip the balance!

:wall: ray: :shifty:

 

[manicm]

I haven't followed all of this thread as it seems to have descended into the usual bashing. However I own ADMs and like them. And I find the LS50 very interesting.

If I wanted a similarly-sized passive speaker, with a similar, well thought-out engineering basis behind it, I would definitely seek out the LS50. Particularly as good power amps are not hard to find. The LS50 looks a particularly well-balanced design and I'm sure it will be easy to drive - so you can probably get away with a good quality AV receiver and have a terrific system

Why are you sure they will be easy to drive? Their sensitivity is 85db and their impedance drops to 3.2ohms. This makes it significantly more difficult to drive than, say, ATC SCM11s.

Not really, ATM doesn't say what their nominal ohms are, but here are the specs - note the amp power requirements. In any event neither speaker are going to work well with a 40w amp are they??

Drivers :
HF 25mm Neodymium, Mid/LF 150mm
Matched Response :
±0.5dB
Frequency Response (-6dB) :
56Hz-22kHz
Dispersion :
±80° Coherent Horizontal, ±10° Coherent Vertical
Sensitivity :
85dB @ 1W @ 1metre
Max SPL :
108dB
Recommended Power Amplifier :
50 to 300 Watts
Nominal Impedance :
8 Ohm
Crossover Frequency :
2.8kHz
Connectors :
Binding Posts/4mm Plugs, bi-wire
Cabinet Dimensions (HxWxD) :
380x211x250mm
Weight :
8.5kg

 

[atticus]

For thrills, kicks and to satisfy any urge to tinker, I am now seeking out the perfect pencil, which is just as time-consuming, but less expensive.

I've tried some of the more expensive brands such as Derwent but I find that the basic Staedtler 110 Tradition cedar wood pencil with either a B or 2B grade graphite is the best for general use.

Don't waste your time on the ones that have erasers on the end because the pink rubber leaves a mark on the paper. You should use a separate eraser anyway, they're much better. Staedtler make very good erasers too IMO.

Hope this information helps with your exciting journey of pencil discovery atticus.

Big fan of the Staedtler myself; thanks for the info

 

[BenLaw]

I haven't followed all of this thread as it seems to have descended into the usual bashing. However I own ADMs and like them. And I find the LS50 very interesting.

If I wanted a similarly-sized passive speaker, with a similar, well thought-out engineering basis behind it, I would definitely seek out the LS50. Particularly as good power amps are not hard to find. The LS50 looks a particularly well-balanced design and I'm sure it will be easy to drive - so you can probably get away with a good quality AV receiver and have a terrific system

Why are you sure they will be easy to drive? Their sensitivity is 85db and their impedance drops to 3.2ohms. This makes it significantly more difficult to drive than, say, ATC SCM11s.

Not really, ATM doesn't say what their nominal ohms are, but here are the specs - note the amp power requirements. In any event neither speaker are going to work well with a 40w amp are they??

Drivers :
HF 25mm Neodymium, Mid/LF 150mm
Matched Response :
±0.5dB
Frequency Response (-6dB) :
56Hz-22kHz
Dispersion :
±80° Coherent Horizontal, ±10° Coherent Vertical
Sensitivity :
85dB @ 1W @ 1metre
Max SPL :
108dB
Recommended Power Amplifier :
50 to 300 Watts
Nominal Impedance :
8 Ohm
Crossover Frequency :
2.8kHz
Connectors :
Binding Posts/4mm Plugs, bi-wire
Cabinet Dimensions (HxWxD) :
380x211x250mm
Weight :
8.5kg

At the moment what?

Doesn't say 'nominal ohms'?? You've listed the nominal impedance.

Both have the same sensitivity. Both have the same nominal impedance. LS50s drop to 3.2ohms as listed on Kef's website. SCM11s drop to 4.8ohms as per stereophile's measurements, first hit on google for ATC scm11 impedance.

Anyway, I wasn't particularly after a comparison, just correcting an assumption which was wrong and putting the true figures in some context given the misconceptions people have about various speakers.

 

[steve_1979]

I should clarify my point: I'm not only refering to bad actives, but differences in user opinions on highly rated brands. Just like how audiophiles will debate whether Monitor Audio, B&W, KEF, Dynaudio etc sound good, bad, boring, neutral, etc etc etc. I see the same kind of debates about the pro audio actives like Genelec, Dynaudio, Mackie, KRK, M-Audio, Focal, Yamaha etc. One person will claim Genelec are the best actives, another will claim that the sound is hyped up to be exciting rather than neutral and hence poor for mixing. I've read pro audio threads asking for the best $1K active monitor, that read the same way such a discussion would go on WHF about the best $1k passive - lots of totally opposite opinions on the sound of each brand and no clear consensus on which brand is the best (or even good).

Yes I see what you mean and I agree that even two reputable brands such as Adam and Genelec can sound very different to one another.

At the end of the day alot of it comes down to personal tastes and preference.

 

[the record spot]

At the end of the day alot of it comes down to personal tastes and preference.

On that, we agree absolutely. :cheer: :cheers:

 

[lindsayt]

When you say that "The essential principle is entirely correct", do you mean that you think that an active crossover as used in the AVI ADM9rs will result in less THD+N than a passive crossover as used in the KEF LS50 at ALL volume levels and frequencies?

No. I mean an active configuration is always better than passive (for any particular speaker).

Your statement is not true.

An active configuration is NOT always better than passive for any particular speaker.

For low level detail passive is ALWAYS better than op amp based active for a given speaker.

Are you aware of the THD+N distortion measurements for op amps over a range of power levels?

 

[Phileas]

For low level detail passive is ALWAYS better than op amp based active for a given speaker.

Are you aware of the THD+N distortion measurements for op amps over a range of power levels?

Even if true, this doesn't really affect the overall principle.

No one is saying actives are perfect Every speaker technology is flawed somehow, even electrostatics.