New KEF Studio monitors - any good?

[Bobbyhifi]

@fr0g: There really wasn't that much passive choice, nothing else really around the £1000 and under point I was looking at, the other models were well into the thousands so I dismissed them. My point wasn't really to have a passive vs active competition but to find the best speaker for my needs and budget really.

@FrankHavrey: Unfortunately no pro stores near me seem to stock them, at least yet. From my discussions with the shop and looking at some pro forums it seems passives really aren't very popular in the home studio field. I must admit I much preferred the pro shopping experience, last time I went Hi-Fi shopping the dealers were far more pushy about certain brands and models, often citing reviews and awards rather than just letting me listen to product I wanted to try. They seemed to have more of an agenda which was strange as I'd be buying the product from them anyway?? The pro shop was very easy going and accommodating.

@steve_1979: Thanks! Don't worry about the thread, it's an interesting read. Funny that the Hi-Fi community seem largely on the passive side and the "Pro" on the active side. I guess this has to do with character versus accuracy or something? I don't really know enough to get that involved in the debate!

Thanks,

Rob.

 

[Frank Harvey]

@FrankHavrey: Unfortunately no pro stores near me seem to stock them, at least yet. From my discussions with the shop and looking at some pro forums it seems passives really aren't very popular in the home studio field. I must admit I much preferred the pro shopping experience, last time I went Hi-Fi shopping the dealers were far more pushy about certain brands and models, often citing reviews and awards rather than just letting me listen to product I wanted to try. They seemed to have more of an agenda which was strange as I'd be buying the product from them anyway?? The pro shop was very easy going and accommodating.

Studios use passive as well as active.

I doubt pro stores will be keeping the LS50 as it'll be available through domestic hi-fi dealers.

If you're not happy with a dealer, don't use them! There's plenty around. For now. All dealers shouldn't be tarred with the same toilet brush that many box shifters get tarred with.

If you're going to hear a specific model, go and hear that specific model and ignore anything they insist on. Once you've heard the product you're interested in, if you're not happy with the dealer, you can then purchase from anywhere you like. The main thing is, you've had a demo, whether you find you like them or not.

Other than the mini Soundstage review, there are no reviews of the LS50, and no awards yet as its new, so they can't use any if that with you.

 

[Anonymous]

The speakers were measured in two different rooms with different acoustics, under different condititions using two different pieces of equiptment.

Even if you measured two identical speakers under these conditions the results would differ.

If I may interject here there are international standards for measuring speakers and well calibrated professional equipment available for doing the job. The room should not come into it, except perhaps in the deep bass.

KEF's engineers for sure have this gear and the experience to use it - it is what they do for a living. I would expect the same to be true for other quality speaker manufacturers.

So while there will be some differences in the measurements they should be small in the context of the overall picture; in any case every single loudspeaker ever made of the same model will differ slightly from its brothers and sisters - the question is what is significant and what is not.

Whilst electronic crossovers can have arbitrarily low levels of distortion, the overall distortion of any loudspeaker, active or passive, will be dominated by the drivers, so I think you have set up something of a straw man when arguing about the distortion levels in electronic crossovers vs the overall distortion in loudspeakers. I think Jack has already politely tried to point this out.

Sincerely,

John Dawson

 

[Bobbyhifi]

@FrankHavrey: Unfortunately no pro stores near me seem to stock them, at least yet. From my discussions with the shop and looking at some pro forums it seems passives really aren't very popular in the home studio field. I must admit I much preferred the pro shopping experience, last time I went Hi-Fi shopping the dealers were far more pushy about certain brands and models, often citing reviews and awards rather than just letting me listen to product I wanted to try. They seemed to have more of an agenda which was strange as I'd be buying the product from them anyway?? The pro shop was very easy going and accommodating.

Studios use passive as well as active.

I doubt pro stores will be keeping the LS50 as it'll be available through domestic hi-fi dealers.

If you're not happy with a dealer, don't use them! There's plenty around. For now. All dealers shouldn't be tarred with the same toilet brush that many box shifters get tarred with.

If you're going to hear a specific model, go and hear that specific model and ignore anything they insist on. Once you've heard the product you're interested in, if you're not happy with the dealer, you can then purchase from anywhere you like. The main thing is, you've had a demo, whether you find you like them or not.

Other than the mini Soundstage review, there are no reviews of the LS50, and no awards yet as its new, so they can't use any if that with you.

Thank you for the information! Do you know if stock is in Hi-Fi dealers yet? I haven't ordered the speakers yet so I could perhaps still try them out. I guess the dealers on the KEF website will all stock them? It's just a shame I won't be able to do a direct comparison demo really. Always hard to tell when going from dealer to dealer with so many variables!

Thanks,

Rob.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I'm guessing not all dealers will have them as some stores concentrate on budget stuff, and some don't do well with 2-channel. It looks like the product is being demonstrated to dealers over the next week or so (we'll hear them tomorrow) and they'll be placing orders if they think it's a model they can sell. It's just down to when KEF are releasing stock.

 

[Clare Newsome]

Review samples are due end of the month, which may be indicative of when a big supply of stock is landing. Sure, as ever, dealer demo stock will be ahead of that.

 

[fr0g]

Whilst electronic crossovers can have arbitrarily low levels of distortion, the overall distortion of any loudspeaker, active or passive, will be dominated by the drivers, so I think you have set up something of a straw man when arguing about the distortion levels in electronic crossovers vs the overall distortion in loudspeakers. I think Jack has already politely tried to point this out.

Sincerely,

John Dawson

I don't think you know what a straw man is. While the overall effect of the crossover may not be the be-all and end-all, it is still a source of distortion that does affect the overall quality of the sound. So there is no straw man involved anywhere.

And surely, not only is the passive crossover more prone to distortion, but it is also less efficient, needing more power from the amplifer (read: more distortion from the amplifier), and the drivers themselves are less well controlled (read : more distortion from the drivers).

ie, it may only be one aspect, but it has knock-on effects.

And if you are striving for the best SQ, then why not choose the best way of doing something?

But of course some manufacturers make amps and not speakers, and some make speakers and not amps, and some make both and perhaps don't want any active version they could produce to reduce sales and margins in the other 2...?

 

[alchemist 1]

Review samples are due end of the month, which may be indicative of when a big supply of stock is landing. Sure, as ever, dealer demo stock will be ahead of that.

So is that before or after the ''r series '' review ?

 

[Clare Newsome]

Someone from WHF will have to answer that - I have no idea. The review samples i'm due are for elsewhere

 

[Anonymous]

Whilst electronic crossovers can have arbitrarily low levels of distortion, the overall distortion of any loudspeaker, active or passive, will be dominated by the drivers, so I think you have set up something of a straw man when arguing about the distortion levels in electronic crossovers vs the overall distortion in loudspeakers. I think Jack has already politely tried to point this out.

Sincerely,

John Dawson

I don't think you know what a straw man is. While the overall effect of the crossover may not be the be-all and end-all, it is still a source of distortion that does affect the overall quality of the sound. So there is no straw man involved anywhere.

And surely, not only is the passive crossover more prone to distortion, but it is also less efficient, needing more power from the amplifer (read: more distortion from the amplifier), and the drivers themselves are less well controlled (read : more distortion from the drivers).

ie, it may only be one aspect, but it has knock-on effects.

And if you are striving for the best SQ, then why not choose the best way of doing something?

But of course some manufacturers make amps and not speakers, and some make speakers and not amps, and some make both and perhaps don't want any active version they could produce to reduce sales and margins in the other 2...?

Brilliant post fr0g, i agree with everything you've said.

So it seems that electronics manufacturers with vested interests in passives, don't accept the benefits of an active crossover.

Manufacturers that only make passive speakers, don't accept the benefits of an active crossover.

And "apparently", the extra accuracy that an active crossover brings is not always audible, according to the house.

Yet the OP instantly dismisses passive speakers because the actives sounded "far cleaner" and more natural

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

The speakers were measured in two different rooms with different acoustics, under different condititions using two different pieces of equiptment.

Even if you measured two identical speakers under these conditions the results would differ.

If I may interject here there are international standards for measuring speakers and well calibrated professional equipment available for doing the job. The room should not come into it, except perhaps in the deep bass.

KEF's engineers for sure have this gear and the experience to use it - it is what they do for a living. I would expect the same to be true for other quality speaker manufacturers.

So while there will be some differences in the measurements they should be small in the context of the overall picture; in any case every single loudspeaker ever made of the same model will differ slightly from its brothers and sisters - the question is what is significant and what is not.

Whilst electronic crossovers can have arbitrarily low levels of distortion, the overall distortion of any loudspeaker, active or passive, will be dominated by the drivers, so I think you have set up something of a straw man when arguing about the distortion levels in electronic crossovers vs the overall distortion in loudspeakers. I think Jack has already politely tried to point this out.

Sincerely,

John Dawson

I see Mr Dawson has beat me to it.

Steve, ever heard about anechoic chambers? and anechoic speaker measurements? this is exactly for the sake of comparability between measurements of different speakers. if you don't have a chamber you can always do quasi anechoic measurement which give accurate enough approximation of anechoic measurements. as for the equipment. I already told you there are specialist equipment available for taking speakers measurements. they are very sensitive and accurate. definitely more accurate taking sound samples than any hi-fi trying to reproduce sound samples.

I really don't know why you're bring up the issue of taking measurements in room. nobody takes such measurements because they are meaningless for wide range of recipients. if you take measurements of some speakers in your room those measurements will be important only to you. they could give you some important hints as to how you should acoustically treat your listening room. but those measurements will give you no basis to compare with other measurements taken in anechoic environment.

 

[John Duncan]

And "apparently", the extra accuracy that an active crossover brings is not always audible, according to the house.

No, that was my suggestion, and I asked whether people agreed with it. Which you did, if I recall...

 

[Frank Harvey]

Well done Max. Did you think of that all on your own?

Ooh.

It's just a bunch if sceptical assumptions really.

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

I don't think you know what a straw man is. While the overall effect of the crossover may not be the be-all and end-all, it is still a source of distortion that does affect the overall quality of the sound. So there is no straw man involved anywhere.

And surely, not only is the passive crossover more prone to distortion, but it is also less efficient, needing more power from the amplifer (read: more distortion from the amplifier), and the drivers themselves are less well controlled (read : more distortion from the drivers).

ie, it may only be one aspect, but it has knock-on effects.

don't you think that when you're measuring harmonic distortion from a speaker you're actually measuring harmonic distortion of the whole system? isn't it what is measured by the mic must have first been amplified by the amp, then split at the xover and in the end excited by the drivers? what knock-on effect? it's the end effect.

 

[Anonymous]

Well done Max. Did you think of that all on your own?

Ooh.

It's just a bunch if sceptical assumptions really.

A bunch of sceptical assumptions, eh?

David, the benefits of active speakers are real and well documented, and it'll take more than a few carefully crafted posts from those who see actives as competition, to convince people otherwise.

As you always say yourself, one should use their own ears, the OP has done so and his verdict is crystal clear, just like the sound of good active speakers and the agenda of the likes of yourself.

Now you have a great day

 

[Frank Harvey]

A bunch of sceptical assumptions, eh?

David, the benefits of active speakers are real and well documented, and it'll take more than a few carefully crafted posts from those who see actives as competition, to convince people otherwise.

I was actually referring to the assumptions made about manufacturers, not about the possibility that actives might sound better to some people. I've said before, I get actives, I understand actives, I've sold actives.

As you always say yourself, one should use their own ears, the OP has done so and his verdict is crystal clear, just like the sound of good active speakers and the agenda of the likes of yourself.

It's been said on forums before - everyone has an agenda, Max.

I just found it odd that the OP started a thread about the KEF's, and then decided on another speaker without hearing what he was originally interested in. If he doesn't like the KEF's, that's fine, that has no effect on me whatsoever. To dismiss all passive speakers based on hearing one or two would be foolish, and I'm sure you'd be saying the same thing if he dismissed active speakers after hearing a pair of KRK's.

Anyway, myself and the OP have already spoken about that

Now you have a great day

It's my day off. I shall.

I'll spend it as I have done this morning - listening to great music reproduced in a beautiful manner by my passive speakers, which I chose using my own ears

 

[alchemist 1]

A bunch of sceptical assumptions, eh?

David, the benefits of active speakers are real and well documented, and it'll take more than a few carefully crafted posts from those who see actives as competition, to convince people otherwise.

I was actually referring to the assumptions made about manufacturers, not about the possibility that actives might sound better to some people. I've said before, I get actives, I understand actives, I've sold actives.

As you always say yourself, one should use their own ears, the OP has done so and his verdict is crystal clear, just like the sound of good active speakers and the agenda of the likes of yourself.

It's been said on forums before - everyone has an agenda, Max.

I just found it odd that the OP started a thread about the KEF's, and then decided on another speaker without hearing what he was originally interested in. If he doesn't like the KEF's, that's fine, that has no effect on me whatsoever. To dismiss all passive speakers based on hearing one or two would be foolish, and I'm sure you'd be saying the same thing if he dismissed active speakers after hearing a pair of KRK's.

Anyway, myself and the OP have already spoken about that

Now you have a great day

It's my day off. I shall.

I'll spend it as I have done this morning - listening to great music reproduced in a beautiful manner by my passive speakers, which I chose using my own ears

Would your ears be ''active'' or ''passive'' ?

 

[Anonymous]

I have got real work to do so won't be able to contribute much more for a while but here is a brief summary of my take on this.

I do not and have never disputed the benefits of active crossovers in loudspeakers. I have several times lectured on audio topics, e.g. at the AES and IET, and I have no doubt I could give a decent academic lecture on the subject of active loudspeakers. In the past I have made lots of active amplification systems for hi-fi loudspeakers (who here remembers ALSO?) whereby an active route was offered for normally passive speakers which had user accessible crossovers. It worked fine (and the active versions on the whole did sound better) but was a commercial failure unless you were able to produce all the key components within one brand.

Frankly the design of a complete commercial loudspeaker system including amplification is a very complex issue. To state the obvious it includes cost, performance, target markets and many other variables. And most speaker makers don't know much about electronics and vice versa.

In typical living room hi-fi space people traditionally mix and match amplification and speakers, according to their needs both now and in the future (e.g. considering upgrading). Several medium sized companies have tried to market really good active hi-fi loudspeakers over the past 30 years, notably Meridian, with a conspicuous lack of commercial success. One exception, if I recall my market stats correctly, is B&O - but they have a different business model involving mostly their own and franchised B&O stores selling only B&O products.

So in this hi-fi space most speakers continue to be passive because it would be commercial suicide to do anything else. Consider a range of say 6 active speakers instead of 6 passive ones - all of them would be much more expensive and each would need different amplification plus horrendously expensive safety and EMC approval procedures, six times over. So the world's bigger speaker companies have learnt to do passive designs very successfully and know all about the effect of different qualities of crossover components on the sound, amongst all the other variables that affect the design. These components certainly matter but, as far as I understand it, are not nearly as important as getting the basic drive units and cabinets as right as possible. In fact the lack of easy electronic correction has, I suggest, lead the best drive units to be of better absolute quality than they otherwise might have been.

Loudspeakers for studio use have different requirements and are, with all due respect, a niche market. Style is of little consequence compared with home audio and it makes sense to have everything in one box, as a plug and play system, fed from the line outputs of a mixer. It is also handy (often essential) to have the power electronics closely integrated with the drive units to avoid failure at high volume levels, so active crossovers then come practically for free and with suitable DSP can provide a more tailored frequency response.

However active crossovers can't control the dispersion characteristics of the different drive units, or most cabinet resonances, to give just a couple of examples. So the overall sound is dependent on many other factors which, I suggest, matter rather more than basing a purchase decision on whether or not a speaker has active crossovers.

Sincerely,

John Dawson

PS - these arguments break down completely when it comes to having personal speakers - e.g. on the desktop. With generally crappy (read cheap) drivers, electronic tuning is essential to get the best performance out of these systems. Of course they will work even better with good drivers

 

[John Duncan]

John

Thanks for that, I found it really informative. No doubt some people will dismiss it as 'having an agenda', but hopefully others will find it useful.

JD

 

[plastic penguin]

Phew! Mr. Dawson has delivered a logicical explanation to a very divisive subject.

 

[Anonymous]

I have got real work to do so won't be able to contribute much more for a while but here is a brief summary of my take on this.

I do not and have never disputed the benefits of active crossovers in loudspeakers. I have several times lectured on audio topics, e.g. at the AES and IET, and I have no doubt I could give a decent academic lecture on the subject of active loudspeakers. In the past I have made lots of active amplification systems for hi-fi loudspeakers (who here remembers ALSO?) whereby an active route was offered for normally passive speakers which had user accessible crossovers. It worked fine (and the active versions on the whole did sound better) but was a commercial failure unless you were able to produce all the key components within one brand.

Frankly the design of a complete commercial loudspeaker system including amplification is a very complex issue. To state the obvious it includes cost, performance, target markets and many other variables. And most speaker makers don't know much about electronics and vice versa.

In typical living room hi-fi space people traditionally mix and match amplification and speakers, according to their needs both now and in the future (e.g. considering upgrading). Several medium sized companies have tried to market really good active hi-fi loudspeakers over the past 30 years, notably Meridian, with a conspicuous lack of commercial success. One exception, if I recall my market stats correctly, is B&O - but they have a different business model involving mostly their own and franchised B&O stores selling only B&O products.

So in this hi-fi space most speakers continue to be passive because it would be commercial suicide to do anything else. Consider a range of say 6 active speakers instead of 6 passive ones - all of them would be much more expensive and each would need different amplification plus horrendously expensive safety and EMC approval procedures, six times over. So the world's bigger speaker companies have learnt to do passive designs very successfully and know all about the effect of different qualities of crossover components on the sound, amongst all the other variables that affect the design. These components certainly matter but, as far as I understand it, are not nearly as important as getting the basic drive units and cabinets as right as possible. In fact the lack of easy electronic correction has, I suggest, lead the best drive units to be of better absolute quality than they otherwise might have been.

Loudspeakers for studio use have different requirements and are, with all due respect, a niche market. Style is of little consequence compared with home audio and it makes sense to have everything in one box, as a plug and play system, fed from the line outputs of a mixer. It is also handy (often essential) to have the power electronics closely integrated with the drive units to avoid failure at high volume levels, so active crossovers then come practically for free and with suitable DSP can provide a more tailored frequency response.

However active crossovers can't control the dispersion characteristics of the different drive units, or most cabinet resonances, to give just a couple of examples. So the overall sound is dependent on many other factors which, I suggest, matter rather more than basing a purchase decision on whether or not a speaker has active crossovers.

Sincerely,

John Dawson

PS - these arguments break down completely when it comes to having personal speakers - e.g. on the desktop. With generally crappy (read cheap) drivers, electronic tuning is essential to get the best performance out of these systems. Of course they will work even better with good drivers

Passive crossovers can't control the different characteristics of the different drive units either, or most cabinet resonances, and their overall sound is dependant on many other factors too, not least the minimising of distortion, which properly designed actives do better.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

Hi Bobbyhifi

If you are willing to also consider used/discontinued speakers then i'll recommend that you should also look out for a pair of ATC's SCM10-2 active monitors as SCM10-2's should be around/within your budget.

This link http://www.traveltraxaudio.com/atc/speakers/loudspeakers/modern-series/scm10-active.htm has some information on SCM10-2's.

Btw, you may also find this http://www.atcloudspeakers.co.uk/downloads/CompanyProfile.pdf useful.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Phileas]

So the main reason most "HiFi" speakers are passive is to do with market forces - nothing to do with performance.

That's whet I thought!

 

[John Duncan]

Passive crossovers can't control the different characteristics of the different drive units either, or most cabinet resonances, and their overall sound is dependant on many other factors too, not least the minimising of distortion, which properly designed actives do better.

Max, I have to applaud you, lecturing John Dawson on loudspeaker design. Well done.

 

[Frank Harvey]

:rofl: