tempted to buy kef 205 or 205/2, how does it pair up with M6 500i?

[apogee]

Hi,

I am quite tempted to upgrade my current B&W floorstanding to a pair of used KEF 205 (priced around 2K, similar to ex-demo 203/2) or 205/2 (priced a little over 3k). The new room is much smaller with open kitchen, so the speakers are positioned quite close to the wall in the lounge part. My gears are powered by an MF M6500i at the moment, and I tend to keep it due to the limited budget.

I am considering the KEF reference is mainly because the speakers have front-faced ports and the bass/treble compensation options to play with.

After looking around in this forum for a while, I found David@FrankHarvey would likely to recommand pairing the 205/2 with some power amplifiers and CnoEvil suggested that 205/2 should at least go with the MF M6500i. The power amplifier upgrading could be done in the near future.

Since I am about to spend some money in the second-hand market, home demoing is hardly a choice.. Also I often have to travel a distance to source a used pair, hence quite difficult to travel with the really heafty M6500i.. So I would like to ask the following questions here before taking out of the wallet:

1. Any one has tried the MF M6500i with the KEF 205 or 205/2? MF AMS35i was quite often mentioned when pairing with the KEF reference.

2. How about the cabling? The MF M6500i provides bi-amp and the KEF has tri-amp posts. What cabling solution may bring the best results?

Many thanks in advance for the helps~~

 

[CnoEvil]

Hi there and welcome to the forum.

I don't have time to give a detailed answer ATM, but will do later on today.

What is your source and which model is your current speakers?

 

[apogee]

Thanks @CnoEvil!

The speakers are 684 (which were used as surround speakers in my HT) as the CM9s are singing for my dad at the moment.

I am playing with the audiolab 8200CDQ and the apogee Mini-DAC. Probably I may replace the current integrated amp with a power amplifier in the near future as the 8200CDQ does include a pre amp.

 

[apogee]

Thanks a lot for the so detailed suggestions! So the kef reference are really true/loyal to what they are feed then.

I noticed on some foreign forums saying the m6500i is not their choice for the 205/2 when compared to a burmester integrated and some other power amps, but that will be something to do in the future.

As for the cabling, I am using some atlas rca and speaker cables and chord optical and xlr, so they should be fine then.

I will try some other brands before finally taking them home~

Thanks again!

 

[CnoEvil]

You're most welcome.

As you can see from most of my suggestions, I don't like analytical components feeding them.

Burmester would be great, but a good step up in price.....as would Mark Levinson.

Good luck with your search and let us know how you get on.

EDIT. One amp I forgot to mention is the Arcam A49, or its Pre/Power version. It reminded me quite a lot of the AMS35i...and more affordable than some of my other options.

 

[CnoEvil]

I'm finally back, so here are my thoughts.

- if you haven't done so, have a look through my "Kef Reference Thread". There is also a couple of threads by Frogfish, where he was matching amps with his 207/2s, as well as getting speaker cables.
- Your M6500i should certainly be fit to get the 205/2s singing. The only problem is that everyone on here that has compared it with the AMS 35i (Roby, Acalex and Neuphonix), preferred the latter (despite the massive power difference).
- The 205/2s are like Chameleons, as they take on the characteristics of the downstream components. They can sound thin, lean and analytical, or organic and engaging, depending on the signal they're fed. They thrive on power and need a really good Source IMO.
- If it was me (which it isn't), I wouldn't be in a hurry to change the amp....you will really see what it is capable of, when you hear it with the Refs.
- I also don't get on with Audiolab, but I see you use a DAC that I'm not familiar with. From my posts, you will see that the Linn DS is my source of choice.
- On the cabling front, I would avoid Silver coated stuff and stick with all copper from the likes of Atlas. I wouldn't bother with bi/tri wiring, but I would replace the Links with what you do use.
- if you do go down the power amp route, I'd be looking at Plinius, Bryston, Electrocompaniet, Abrahamsen, Mc Intosh and Classe.

 

[Vaprak001]

...with Bryston 28BSST2's which sound very good. Also tried the speakers with the Bryston 4BSST2 with a (disconcertingly) close quality of sound, certainly enough grunt. The M6500 is listed at 500w per channel so no need to change amps at all if its power you're worried about.

If the M6500 sound is bothering you, as Bryston have just brought out new models across the range (called cubed) you may be able to snag a bargain. Quite a few of SST2's up on the bay already. If you want Neutral they're a good combo worth auditioning.

You could even use the M6500i as a pre, then find one later to taste.

 

[CnoEvil]

One more thing. It is worth noting that the /2 version is a big step up....better bass and smoother treble (as well as losing the super tweeter perched on top).

 

[apogee]

...with Bryston 28BSST2's which sound very good. Also tried the speakers with the Bryston 4BSST2 with a (disconcertingly) close quality of sound, certainly enough grunt. The M6500 is listed at 500w per channel so no need to change amps at all if its power you're worried about.

If the M6500 sound is bothering you, as Bryston have just brought out new models across the range (called cubed) you may be able to snag a bargain. Quite a few of SST2's up on the bay already. If you want Neutral they're a good combo worth auditioning.

You could even use the M6500i as a pre, then find one later to taste.

Thanks for the advice! I think I will stick with the M6500i at the moment.

 

[apogee]

One more thing. It is worth noting that the /2 version is a big step up....better bass and smoother treble (as well as losing the super tweeter perched on top).

Yes, I am more towards the /2 too.

Edit: ever compared the 205/2 with the latest reference 5?

 

[CnoEvil]

I have compared the 203/2 with the Ref 3.

I talked about it on this thread: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/if-i-was-starting-again.

 

[CnoEvil]

I have compared the 203/2 with the Ref 3.

I talked about it on this thread: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/if-i-was-starting-again.

 

[apogee]

I went through that thread, it seems the latest reference 3 made some impressive improvement over the 203/2. I will try to have a go myself when possible.

I also have noticed that you mentioned the current R series in terms of VFM, will you still recommend the R900 over the 205/2 at the moment? It is always good to save some penny for the lady to spend~

 

[Andrewjvt]

I went through that thread, it seems the latest reference 3 made some impressive improvement over the 203/2.  I will try to have a go myself when possible.

I also have noticed that you mentioned the current R series in terms of VFM, will you still recommend the R900 over the 205/2 at the moment?  It is always good to save some penny for the lady to spend~

As good as the r series are i think theres better out. Have a listen to other brands also

 

[apogee]

I went through that thread, it seems the latest reference 3 made some impressive improvement over the 203/2. I will try to have a go myself when possible.

I also have noticed that you mentioned the current R series in terms of VFM, will you still recommend the R900 over the 205/2 at the moment? It is always good to save some penny for the lady to spend~

As good as the r series are i think theres better out. Have a listen to other brands also

Do you mean the 205/2 or 203/2 are clearly better than the R series?

 

[Andrewjvt]

I went through that thread, it seems the latest reference 3 made some impressive improvement over the 203/2.  I will try to have a go myself when possible.

I also have noticed that you mentioned the current R series in terms of VFM, will you still recommend the R900 over the 205/2 at the moment?  It is always good to save some penny for the lady to spend~

As good as the r series are i think theres better out. Have a listen to other brands also

?

Do you mean the 205/2 or 203/2 are clearly better than the R series?

The reference is better than the r series but there are other makes of speaker also other than kef imo better value for money

 

[apogee]

Yes of course. I am looking for speakers with front facing ports, so I may place them very close to the walls. Any suggestions?

 

[Andrewjvt]

Yes of course.  I am looking for speakers with front facing ports, so I may place them very close to the walls.  Any suggestions?

Yes look at Atc. Sealed design no ports much better for placement and when i demod the atc scm40s they made my r700s sound like a blanket was over the speaker in comparrison (slightly exaggerating) but the clarity of them is very good

 

[apogee]

Thanks I will have a look later.

 

[CnoEvil]

I also have noticed that you mentioned the current R series in terms of VFM, will you still recommend the R900 over the 205/2 at the moment?  It is always good to save some penny for the lady to spend~

That depends on how much you are paying for the Refs....IMO they weren't worth 4x more than the R700s (which is my pick of the range).

 

[apogee]

I did spend quite a few hours at David's in Coventry and David did all the heavy work moving the speakers which were all stone heavy, hence a big thanks for David above all.

As there was no M6500i around, David gave me two amps (MF M6si and Chord 2650) to play around when I listened to:

1. Kef Reference 3 (new),

2 Kef 203/2 (old),

3. B&W 804 D3 (the latest),

4. ATC SCM40.

For the amps, I would say the Chord was fantastic for classicals but a bit lean or dry for some vocal, and the M6si was making the Ref 3 a bit muffled at the begining.

For the speakers, the latest Kef Ref 3 presented more detail, better coherence and the most significant: a slightly deeper but well controlled bass, when compared with 203/2. But 203/2 gave me a much appreciated treble as part of an easier listening sound. As David said, the Ref 3 was more laid back while the 203/2 tended to be more forward. When it came to the more complicated classicals, Ref 3 was the winner. The Ref 3 rebuilt a better performing stage, not in the width of the soundstage but the thickness (more layers) of the soundstage if you know what I am talking here. Each instrument was more defined for its position on the stage. However, I would say the 203/2 would be my choice for their giving prices in the shop.

After lunch, I listened to the 804 D3, I preferred them to the other three pairs. It ticked almost all the boxes. Probably it was that pint of lager at lunch or that bit of tireness in the afternoon doing the trick but I did like them the most as for my personal taste. This pair showed a good combination of a wide clear treble and a well controlled bass. I found myself more engaging when listeng to them.

I did not spend long with the ATC as I was feeling too cold, a lack of excitement, when listening to them.. Perhaps it was due to its more analytical nature. Since I already have a pair of HD800 headphones, I would choose something less analytical or fatiguing when sitting in the sofa.

After all, I decided to spend some more time in the market to find opportunites to try a bigger variety of speakers before buying. Hope my English did not bring much confusion to any of you since it is not my mother tongue..

 

[CnoEvil]

What source was used?

 

[iceman16]

Is there any chance you can listen to some Focal electra's or the new Sopra range?

 

[apogee]

What source was used?

Audiolab 8300

 

[apogee]

Is there any chance you can listen to some Focal electra's or the new Sopra range?

Yes, that is the plan.