New KEF Studio monitors - any good?

[The_Lhc]

Bobby, i'd try to listen to a few different models if i were you, as they can sound very different from one to the next. The Adam A5X sounds totally different to the KRK Rokits, for example, i much preferred the former which some say are on the bright side, yet i felt they were very smooth sounding and the KRKs horribly bright. The store owners taste might be different from yours so listening to several monitors would be wise, IMO.

But but but, this isn't possible, Active speakers are more accurate, if they're all accurate how can they possibly sound different from one another?

No speaker is accurate..

But the distortion on an active crossover is only 0.0001% or something else equally inaudible (according to one poster here), so if that's the case then how can any active speaker sound different from any other if they're all reproducing the recording to 99.9999% of the original?

 

[Anonymous]

Bobby, i'd try to listen to a few different models if i were you, as they can sound very different from one to the next. The Adam A5X sounds totally different to the KRK Rokits, for example, i much preferred the former which some say are on the bright side, yet i felt they were very smooth sounding and the KRKs horribly bright. The store owners taste might be different from yours so listening to several monitors would be wise, IMO.

But but but, this isn't possible, Active speakers are more accurate, if they're all accurate how can they possibly sound different from one another?

No speaker is accurate..

But the distortion on an active crossover is only 0.0001% or something else equally inaudible (according to one poster here), so if that's the case then how can any active speaker sound different from any other if they're all reproducing the recording to 99.9999% of the original?

You'll need to take that up with the person that said so. If you'd like to discuss something that i've said, that's fine, just make sure that i've actually said it first please

 

[chebby]

Only another 592 posts to go.

 

[The_Lhc]

Bobby, i'd try to listen to a few different models if i were you, as they can sound very different from one to the next. The Adam A5X sounds totally different to the KRK Rokits, for example, i much preferred the former which some say are on the bright side, yet i felt they were very smooth sounding and the KRKs horribly bright. The store owners taste might be different from yours so listening to several monitors would be wise, IMO.

But but but, this isn't possible, Active speakers are more accurate, if they're all accurate how can they possibly sound different from one another?

No speaker is accurate..

But the distortion on an active crossover is only 0.0001% or something else equally inaudible (according to one poster here), so if that's the case then how can any active speaker sound different from any other if they're all reproducing the recording to 99.9999% of the original?

You'll need to take that up with the person that said so. If you'd like to discuss something that i've said, that's fine, just make sure that i've actually said it first please

Leave it out Max you've been banging this drum ever since you came back, actives are more accurate, actives are more accurate, if they all sound different from each other how can you say any of them are any more accurate than any other speaker?

 

[The_Lhc]

Only another 592 posts to go.

It won't take me that long.

 

[Anonymous]

Bobby, i'd try to listen to a few different models if i were you, as they can sound very different from one to the next. The Adam A5X sounds totally different to the KRK Rokits, for example, i much preferred the former which some say are on the bright side, yet i felt they were very smooth sounding and the KRKs horribly bright. The store owners taste might be different from yours so listening to several monitors would be wise, IMO.

But but but, this isn't possible, Active speakers are more accurate, if they're all accurate how can they possibly sound different from one another?

No speaker is accurate..

But the distortion on an active crossover is only 0.0001% or something else equally inaudible (according to one poster here), so if that's the case then how can any active speaker sound different from any other if they're all reproducing the recording to 99.9999% of the original?

You'll need to take that up with the person that said so. If you'd like to discuss something that i've said, that's fine, just make sure that i've actually said it first please

Leave it out Max you've been banging this drum ever since you came back, actives are more accurate, actives are more accurate, if they all sound different from each other how can you say any of them are any more accurate than any other speaker?

You need to re-read my posts, if you want to be a hero, you need to put in some effort...

 

[The_Lhc]

Bobby, i'd try to listen to a few different models if i were you, as they can sound very different from one to the next. The Adam A5X sounds totally different to the KRK Rokits, for example, i much preferred the former which some say are on the bright side, yet i felt they were very smooth sounding and the KRKs horribly bright. The store owners taste might be different from yours so listening to several monitors would be wise, IMO.

But but but, this isn't possible, Active speakers are more accurate, if they're all accurate how can they possibly sound different from one another?

No speaker is accurate..

But the distortion on an active crossover is only 0.0001% or something else equally inaudible (according to one poster here), so if that's the case then how can any active speaker sound different from any other if they're all reproducing the recording to 99.9999% of the original?

You'll need to take that up with the person that said so. If you'd like to discuss something that i've said, that's fine, just make sure that i've actually said it first please

Leave it out Max you've been banging this drum ever since you came back, actives are more accurate, actives are more accurate, if they all sound different from each other how can you say any of them are any more accurate than any other speaker?

You need to re-read my posts, if you want to be a hero, you need to put in some effort...

And if you want to be some kind of guru you need to understand what you're talking about, rather than just parroting what you see other people saying elsewhere, you don't have even the most basic understanding of electronics and yet you wax lyrical on whatever topic you think your opinion is needed on without having the faintest idea of what you're saying. I'm surprised your "C" and "V" keys haven't worn out with all the copying and pasting you do, go get yourself an opinion that's actually yours and see how you get on with that. That way you might be able to defend it when someone questions what you say instead of evading the subject and trying to pretend you said something different.

 

[Anonymous]

Bobby, i'd try to listen to a few different models if i were you, as they can sound very different from one to the next. The Adam A5X sounds totally different to the KRK Rokits, for example, i much preferred the former which some say are on the bright side, yet i felt they were very smooth sounding and the KRKs horribly bright. The store owners taste might be different from yours so listening to several monitors would be wise, IMO.

But but but, this isn't possible, Active speakers are more accurate, if they're all accurate how can they possibly sound different from one another?

No speaker is accurate..

But the distortion on an active crossover is only 0.0001% or something else equally inaudible (according to one poster here), so if that's the case then how can any active speaker sound different from any other if they're all reproducing the recording to 99.9999% of the original?

You'll need to take that up with the person that said so. If you'd like to discuss something that i've said, that's fine, just make sure that i've actually said it first please

Leave it out Max you've been banging this drum ever since you came back, actives are more accurate, actives are more accurate, if they all sound different from each other how can you say any of them are any more accurate than any other speaker?

You need to re-read my posts, if you want to be a hero, you need to put in some effort...

And if you want to be some kind of guru you need to understand what you're talking about, rather than just parroting what you see other people saying elsewhere, you don't have even the most basic understanding of electronics and yet you wax lyrical on whatever topic you think your opinion is needed on without having the faintest idea of what you're saying. I'm surprised your "C" and "V" keys haven't worn out with all the copying and pasting you do, go get yourself an opinion that's actually yours and see how you get on with that. That way you might be able to defend it when someone questions what you say instead of evading the subject and trying to pretend you said something different.

Haha, so i'm just parroting what i see other people saying "elswhere" , that saying is so in Vogue

And i haven't the faintest idea about what i'm saying? Really? I have no opinions of my own? Yeah given my past history on here it's clear that i follow the pack isn't it :?

You don't need to understand something to comment on it, i mean, i've seen you discuss politeness and tact :shifty:

 

[Clare Newsome]

Please play nicely everyone (yes, everyone) and get back on topic. Thank you

 

[poldo]

And if you want to be some kind of guru you need to understand what you're talking about, rather than just parroting what you see other people saying elsewhere, you don't have even the most basic understanding of electronics and yet you wax lyrical on whatever topic you think your opinion is needed on without having the faintest idea of what you're saying. I'm surprised your "C" and "V" keys haven't worn out with all the copying and pasting you do, go get yourself an opinion that's actually yours and see how you get on with that. That way you might be able to defend it when someone questions what you say instead of evading the subject and trying to pretend you said something different.

Amen, totally agree with this

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Phil

I need to confirm if it is exactly the same driver as the R100 or not, but even if it is, the cabinet of the LS50 is a total redesign, with completely new and unique aspects like the port. Ignore the price point as its a totally independent model that doesn't belong to any of the KEF ranges.

As these have been designed more from a monitor point of view, I can see these replacing my existing R300's in my 5.1 system if they sound like I think they do. I'll find out Friday

David - I believe the team started the design with the R100 driver but made a number of changes as they went along - so the answer is that the drivers are not the same.

John

 

[Frank Harvey]

Thanks John.

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

http://www.kef.com/html/gb/showroom/flagship_hi-fi_series/LS50/fact_sheet/LS50_group/LS50/index.html

They are for domestic use, but have been designed from a studio point of view regarding their sound.

thanks for the link David.

I took a look at the spec and noted harmonic distortion figure for the speakers in question : <0.4% harmonic distortion for 2nd and 3rd harmonics for 175 Hz - 20 000 Hz at 90 dB spl at 1m.

now, let's take a look at an active pro monitor counterpart. for instance, there's Event Electronics with their Opal speakers. the president of the company in one of videos on youtube argues that "no other monitor in the world could match Opal's ultra low distortion, real midrange clarity or peak dynamic reproduction capability". obviously Event Electronics must feel pretty strong about those aspects of performance of their speakers. I don't want to discuss peak dynamic reproduction capabilities (those interested in the topic may want to take a look at Wisdom's Audio products. 127dB at 4m anyone?). nor real midrange clarity (you need to listen to speakers first to be able to discuss it. BTW I'd wager that Wisdom Audio would favorably compete in this discipline as well). what I want discuss are THD figures.

Event quotes 0.2% 3rd harmonic distortion for 200 Hz - 20 000 Hz at 90 dB spl at 1m. note; it's only 3rd harmonic and not 2nd and 3rd combined. as everybody knows 2nd harmonic is always the major contributor of harmonic distortion for speakers so I would expect given figure to raise to more or less 0.4% if combined distortion was quoted.

question; where is this miraculously low distortion of active speakers disappeared? ( this question is addressed mostly to ooh../ Max and Stevie and maybe also guys at HDD forum because that's where those two mostly gain their inspiration from, I think).

 

[ROTH AV]

FOR NEAR FIELD MONITORING - GENELEC OR JBL.

SOME OF THE KRK STUFF IS PRETTY GOOD TOO.

SIMPLES.

 

[batonwielder]

Is the LS50 made in England?

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure i understand the question, Oldric, perhaps David can fill you in as he's familiar with KEF.

Btw, somebody should enlighten the guys on Gearslutz about these little KEFs, they like accurate monitors, they rate the Opals as amongst the best tool for their job too, and could save money ditching them for the little KEFs.

 

[alchemist 1]

Any specification information on them ?

Will they be for domestic use ?

http://www.kef.com/html/gb/showroom/flagship_hi-fi_series/LS50/fact_sheet/LS50_group/LS50/index.html

They are for domestic use, but have been designed from a studio point of view regarding their sound.

They do look the ticket. I notice the lowish 85db sensitivity. Competion wise which group of speakers would they be aimed at. ?

 

[Frank Harvey]

I'm not sure i understand the question, Oldric, perhaps David can fill you in as he's familiar with KEF.

Oldric has put the question to yourself

 

[Frank Harvey]

Is the LS50 made in England?

I don't know at this stage, but I'll know Friday when I hear them. I'm guessing that because of the price, they're made in KEF's Chinese factory where they make the R series, but I could be wrong. I'll confirm once I know.

 

[Frank Harvey]

They do look the ticket. I notice the lowish 85db sensitivity. Competion wise which group of speakers would they be aimed at. ?

I don't think they've aimed them at any specific group of speakers really. They've been designed for those that want a studio sound in their living room, so are going to differ from hi-fi speakers in their presentation. They're just for people that want a small, highly detailed monitor.

 

[steve_1979]

But the distortion on an active crossover is only 0.0001% or something else equally inaudible (according to one poster here), so if that's the case then how can any active speaker sound different from any other if they're all reproducing the recording to 99.9999% of the original?

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp and will only have about 0.001% distortion compared to a passive crossover which has about 1% distortion at best and this can rise to as much as 10% at high power. [LINK REMOVED - house rules]

However, just because an active crossover has 0.001% distortion this doesn't mean that an active speaker will be 99.999% accurate because there are many other factors that will effect the sound such as the drivers and enclosure.

But but but, this isn't possible, Active speakers are more accurate, if they're all accurate how can they possibly sound different from one another?

All speakers are a compromise and no speaker is perfectly accurate. Often when a speaker is designed to be good in certain areas it will be worse in other areas. A good speaker designer needs to know which compromises they can live with and which ones need to be minimised. This is why speakers sound different, even the ones that are relatively accurate.

 

[bigblue235]

Max, If I put it in a less confrontational way than the_lhc will you indulge me?

You keep going on about accuracy, and how Actives are more accurate, etc. etc. An Active crossover may introduce less distortion than a Passive one, but that's only one factor involved in what reaches your lugholes. I immediately thought exactly the same as the_lhc when reading your post, and I agree pretty much with what he says. By your logic, Actives should not be bright or have any other obvious characteristics.

An Active speaker may have less distortion at the crossover but, if it then has a bright tweeter, what you hear is far from accurate. It's all well and good getting an accurate signal to the speakers, but it's quite another to get an accurate sound from the speakers.

What I'm long-windedly trying to say is that, as a package, the Kef's may well have the most accurate output. We can't presume they don't, just because they're Passive.

 

[steve_1979]

You keep going on about accuracy, and how Actives are more accurate, etc. etc. An Active crossover may introduce less distortion than a Passive one, but that's only one factor involved in what reaches your lugholes.

......

An Active speaker may have less distortion at the crossover but, if it then has a bright tweeter, what you hear is far from accurate. It's all well and good getting an accurate signal to the speakers, but it's quite another to get an accurate sound from the speakers.

I agree with this.

 

[Anonymous]

An electronic crossover is just an op-amp

Uh, an op-amp (operational amplifier) is an amplifier with differential inputs, not a filter. There is no way that "just an op-amp" can exhibit any kind of filtering properties like what's needed for a voice-range crossover.

And as for your link, "I measured a typical 2 Way 2nd order LR crossover" vs "the active filters in the ADM9s are [..] better than the passive crossover". Talk about choosing your opposition... how many passive speakers use a "typical 2 way 2nd order LR crossover", you think?

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

I'm not sure i understand the question, Oldric, perhaps David can fill you in as he's familiar with KEF.

let me rephrase then.

you're always banging on how active speakers are "more accurate" because they use active xover which distort less. that may be true. but as you can see from my (just one ) example when you match output from top flight active monitors and passive monitors measurements show that distortion levels are very much comparable. so, the question is; how is this possible that an active speaker, having such a great technological advantage over a passive speaker - the active xover, can't beat a passive speaker in terms of harmonic distortion? and since lower distortion is synonymous with greater accuracy (at least that's how I can gather from your posts) how can active speakers be more accurate?

is it more clear now?