I never specifically referenced the R11 Meta
R7 Meta and the SVS Pinnacle have the same MSRP and are the more apt price-to-price comparison. I understand that SVS likely has the output and low end advantage, though I still haven't seen Max SPL figures reported for the Pinnacle.
Agreed. My point was in contrasting the more similar models by design, though, not by price as the main determinant.
Ultimately, SVS and KEF aren’t competing for the same market. I could say that I have a feeling SVS would hope to peel away some people that can just afford the mid range KEF R Metas… But I doubt KEF would see that as a problem. If/when KEF updates the Q series, then we are talking more apples to apples.
But that is just speculation and opinion, on my part, stacked on top of each other.
Added thoughts about the place these fit overall, and not meant as dedicated response to KD
:
While prices have risen over the past several years, we’ve also seen several companies step up their game and offer more Speaker for that price. DefTech Demands, the Founder series, Reserve series... all showed instances of companies taking some worthwhile steps forward. In many ways, SVS is joining that crowd now. Six years ago, many of these would have probably been $2500-$3000 per pair, but now are $4000-$5000.
Kef R series has always been next level above that of the Speakers I mentioned above. That the pricing for the R series is more closely matching those others is impressive. I can only assume this is because of the trickle down technology helping bring price down per unit, but still rising above to a different price category.
I see the SVS Ultra Evolution doing the same as these other Speaker companies I referenced. They're updating and old line and trying to differentiate themselves while operating in the same market but with more strict rules. If or when SVS updates the Prime series and can introduce some of the technology from the UE series, that will be a very good day for consumers overall.
Completely as an aside, when I saw the measurements, my suspicion was that they probably sound better than the measurement looks. We know there is a case for this. Without hearing it, I definitely have (and voiced earlier in this thread) concern about the crossover region. Overall, directivity looks pretty good except for that region of the FR. They definitely made a weird choice in how they tackled this design, and not in terms of the "time-alignment."
These re not KEF or Focal Speakers. These are SVS. Other sites have opined that users want these to be an option for this or that other brand...
They are. But how
you (that's the royal you, not any you in specific
) value your Speaker and how you choose where you spend your money is a key component that is being left out. It's not all about being a KEF-killer: Clearly this wasn't in SVS' design philosophy.
Yes they made some interesting and perhaps questionable choices with how the XO is designed and the Speaker voiced. Many companies still do that and do just fine selling Speakers with their own unique flaws.
This review has reveled those for this product and hopefully SVS will iterate based on this feedback and do something better next time.
That's not to say that these Speakers aren't worth purchasing... but again, that's a value that each individual shopper has to decide on for themselves.
