cpp
Audioholic Ninja
on spec's maybe but can you actually ear the difference ?
"Let our rigorous testing and reviews be your guidelines to A/V equipment – not marketing slogans"
cpp
Audioholic Ninja
nope didn't pay $1000 for a CD player keep guessing
. and to quote someone "I honestly, genuinely, >> don't know <<
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
Yup, theories are great to talk about. It's fun. But whether they actually make a significant difference in reality is another matter.
And I'm sure he bought the $1K CD player purely based on aesthetics.
Don't we all?
And I'm sure he bought the $1K CD player purely based on aesthetics.
Don't we all?
cpp
Audioholic Ninja
oh yes "speculation", "opinion" or "hypothesis".
"The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees in every object only the traits which favor that theory." -Thomas Jefferson
K
Ken Shabby
Audiophyte
I've always found Kef's outstanding speakers (I own a pair of 105/2's), but are terribly overpriced.
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
Well, I don't think the Kent Engineering Foundry speakers are any more overpriced than B&W, Revel, or other brands.
For example, a brand new KEF Q900 retail is $800 each.
A NHT Classic Four tower is retailed @ $900 each.
The Aperion Versus Grand is $900 each.
The Axioms M80 are ~ $700 each.
The new Ascend Sierra towers are going to be close to $800-$900 each.
You can get the Q900 like-new open box for $570 each shipped.
For example, a brand new KEF Q900 retail is $800 each.
A NHT Classic Four tower is retailed @ $900 each.
The Aperion Versus Grand is $900 each.
The Axioms M80 are ~ $700 each.
The new Ascend Sierra towers are going to be close to $800-$900 each.
You can get the Q900 like-new open box for $570 each shipped.
Last edited:
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
Looks like KEF is replacing the XQ-series with the new R-series, which are suppose to be bigger in size than the Q-series (R900 larger than Q900), but similar squarish/rectangular shapes, instead of the rounder shapes.
Price will be similar to the XQ-series.
Some of the big difference are the cabinet material, the Uni-Q and driver configurations. The Qs are designed with a an active Uni-Q on top, a passive radiator, active LF and another passive radiator in a closed box. The R is designed with a Active LF, Uni-Q and then another active LF with multiple rear ports (I'm comparing the Q900 and the R900). The Uni-Q comes very close to the Blade Uni-Q except is it a smaller Uni-Q.
There will be a lot of technology from KEF Blade that will go into the Drivers.
The flagship R900 will have 2 x 8" LF drivers in the speaker and both will be active.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=724103&page=144
Price will be similar to the XQ-series.
Some of the big difference are the cabinet material, the Uni-Q and driver configurations. The Qs are designed with a an active Uni-Q on top, a passive radiator, active LF and another passive radiator in a closed box. The R is designed with a Active LF, Uni-Q and then another active LF with multiple rear ports (I'm comparing the Q900 and the R900). The Uni-Q comes very close to the Blade Uni-Q except is it a smaller Uni-Q.
There will be a lot of technology from KEF Blade that will go into the Drivers.
The flagship R900 will have 2 x 8" LF drivers in the speaker and both will be active.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=724103&page=144
D
DS-21
Full Audioholic
Unfortunate that it's also (seemingly) going to be in a high-diffraction cabinet.
On the plus side, finish quality should be better and it's much easier to plug ports than replace PR's.
On the plus side, finish quality should be better and it's much easier to plug ports than replace PR's.
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
OK, the Stereophile review of the Q900 is finally posted online:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-q900-loudspeaker-measurements
Other than the low-level peaks in the mid-treble, the cumulative spectral-decay or waterfall plot on the tweeter axis is superbly clean throughout the midrange and treble.
Despite its affordable price, KEF's Q900 offers superb measured performance...
What is your take on the KEF Q900's Stereophile's overall measurements compared to other speakers in the $5K, $3K, & $2K range?
http://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-q900-loudspeaker-measurements
Other than the low-level peaks in the mid-treble, the cumulative spectral-decay or waterfall plot on the tweeter axis is superbly clean throughout the midrange and treble.
Despite its affordable price, KEF's Q900 offers superb measured performance...
What is your take on the KEF Q900's Stereophile's overall measurements compared to other speakers in the $5K, $3K, & $2K range?
GranteedEV
Audioholic Ninja
I really don't like how John Atksinon doesn't give a true summed quasi-anechoic response graph.. his graphs can be so confusing with each individual driver.anyways...
that 8khz metal cone breakup from about 6khz to 10khz does not look very suppressed at only ~12db below drive level. Most designers try to get these kind of breakups like 25+db below the drive level. It might sound harsh in the treble!
that 8khz metal cone breakup from about 6khz to 10khz does not look very suppressed at only ~12db below drive level. Most designers try to get these kind of breakups like 25+db below the drive level. It might sound harsh in the treble!
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
Yeah, what the heck was John Atkinson thinking?
Why would he not do the traditional summed anechoic on-axis FR graph??
Why would he not do the traditional summed anechoic on-axis FR graph??
GranteedEV
Audioholic Ninja
On second look, that's what the red line was. I do like the idea of measuring indiivudal drivers, because it gave a bit of insight on cone breakup. I wonder if the crossover can be modified on these Q900s to reduce the level of the breakup.
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
So then what is the on-axis FR in terms of the usual 200Hz-10kHz +/- ?On second look, that's what the red line was. I do like the idea of measuring indiivudal drivers, because it gave a bit of insight on cone breakup. I wonder if the crossover can be modified on these Q900s to reduce the level of the breakup.
And what is the -3dB bass response?
jmy2469
Junior Audioholic
I own the Q900's,Q600C and I just ordered the Q800's for surrounds. I have them hooked up to the Arcam AVR 600. Everything sounds great!
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
jmy2469
Junior Audioholic
Yes they do!
T
tiberius1023
Audiophyte
I agree with you...I actually like the look of the Q900s...to be honest though I really don't care what they look like as long as they sound good.
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
I love the way it looks too.
DenPureSound
Senior Audioholic
And KEF uses Real Wood veneer not plastic on the Enclosure. I like the dual passive radiators vs. the bass reflex ports that could and have caused Chuffing.
Also, KEF uses separated cabinet design, Mid/Tweet separated from Woofer.
Like the Tangerine Waveguide, and having "One Mouth" for both the Tweet/Mid driver as one point source, makes sense to me.
Now, onto Auditioning them for <$2K if they sound as good as the Engineering that went into the UniQ development, they will have a real winner!
Sitemap
Site Information
Site Information
HTML
