Kef R300 vs LS50

[Kaikias]

So I've narrowed down my search to these two speakers, from what I've read they're similar sounding with the r300 having better base and sound stage, though not as accurate (some say they sound a little better becouse of this) and am leaning towards it. Anyone have either of these and what are your thoughts?

My other question is I'm looking at the Marantz PM5005 and PM6005, one has a integrated DAC the other doesn't- price wise I could buy the 5005 and get the Cambridge DAC-IT X and they would work out the same, or perhaps I should go another route?

Thanks for any suggestions

 

[mlknez]

I have the LS50 and have heard the r300. The r300 does have deeper base ability. I got the LS50 because of their size as mine are in use as a home office desk system. I use a subwoofer with mine to get to the low bass. Is yours for music only? How far away will you be sitting? How big is the room? What kind of music do you listen to?

 

[Steve81]

So I've narrowed down my search to these two speakers, from what I've read they're similar sounding with the r300 having better base and sound stage, though not as accurate (some say they sound a little better becouse of this) and am leaning towards it. Anyone have either of these and what are your thoughts?

The speakers are voiced a little differently, so from that standpoint, you'd have to listen to see which you prefer. Beyond that, the R300 is a larger 3-way design so it can play deeper as well as louder without strain. How much that matters depends on your intended use as mlknez mentions.

 

[tyhjaarpa]

What I have heard I would suggest LS50. For stereo listening they have enough bass imo, and for HT use you want sub anyways.

 

[Kaikias]

Right now they'll be used with my computer, and later moved to a small HT setup. Right now it's about 80/20 music movies (mostly Netflix) in a 15*20 room (small apartment while I'm finishing up school)

Unfortunately I don't have the ability to listen to them before I order so I'm going into this blind. The LS50 are about 300 cheaper then what I could get the r300 for leaving me some for a sub, but not the 1k+ I would need for a good sub. At the volumes I listen I think the r300 might be better since I wouldn't need the sub.

 

[Dr. Bob]

I found the LS50s unpleasantly harsh when I listened to them in the store. Haven't heard the R300s, so I can't compare. LS50s are definitely missing something on the low end, so the R300s might be the way to go if you're not adding a sub.

 

[PENG]

The LS50 does sound like the Blades less the deep bass. I heard no harshness, the violin sounds great through them. For a little over 1K, they may be unbeatable. I typically don't pay much attention to Stereophile reviews except their bench tests, in this case I can agree with their reviewers including J. Atkinson who praised those little speakers and justifiably so. They do need a sub but probably would do fine in a small room without any sub.

The R300 sounds good too, but until you step up to the R500 and above, you are going to need a sub. I doubt the R300 can do much better than the LS50 in bass at all, perhaps just a touch better. In a small room both of them can survive without a sub.

 

[Kaikias]

The LS50 does sound like the Blades less the deep bass. I heard no harshness, the violin sounds great through them. For a little over 1K, they may be unbeatable. I typically don't pay much attention to Stereo review except their bench tests, in this case I can agree with their reviewers including J. Atkinson who praised those little speakers and justifiably so. They do need a sub but probably would do fine in a small room without any sub.

The R300 sounds good too, but until you step up to the R500 and above, you are going to need a sub. I doubt the R300 can do much better than the LS50 in bass at all, perhaps just a touch better. In a small room both of them can survive without a sub.

After the input here and some other reviews I came to the same conclusion, I'm going to go with the LS50s. Now I just need to find a amp for it. I can get the Marantz PM7005 for a good price, and am leaning towards it- info on it is a little sparse so I was wondering if anyone here had some experience with it.

The only issue is the marantz wouldn't allow me to add a sub if I wanted to, any other suggestions as far as marantz go? Because of my employment I can get great prices on these so would like to stick to marantz if possible.

 

[PENG]

After the input here and some other reviews I came to the same conclusion, I'm going to go with the LS50s. Now I just need to find a amp for it. I can get the Marantz PM7005 for a good price, and am leaning towards it- info on it is a little sparse so I was wondering if anyone here had some experience with it.

The only issue is the marantz wouldn't allow me to add a sub if I wanted to, any other suggestions as far as marantz go? Because of my employment I can get great prices on these so would like to stick to marantz if possible.

I am not a fan of that Marantz amp, but yes you can add a sub, just no bass management.

 

[Kaikias]

I am not a fan of that Marantz amp, but yes you can add a sub, just no bass management.

Any specific reasons you don't like the Marantz amp? The other option I was looking at is the Peachtree Audio Nova125- they sell the refurbished ones on ebay for a couple hundred more then what I could get the Marantz for, would it be worth jumping up in price for them or are they similar?

 

[KEW]

I am not a fan of that Marantz amp, but yes you can add a sub, just no bass management.

Is there a Marantz product you would recommend?

 

[PENG]

Is there a Marantz product you would recommend?

Their older amps for sure. The newer models look great but I don't really want to pay more for less.