Kef Reference 5
- Thread starter volks
- Start date
audio.bill
Active member
Haven't heard the Reference Fives, but did audition the Ones and Threes. They are impeccably finished, particularly the gloss rosewood finish is absolutely stunning in its appearance. The gloss finish is so deep it almost looks as if there's a layer of glass on top of the wood. They image superbly as do all of the KEF Uni-Q designs, with less of a need to stay in the sweet spot than most other speakers while still maintaining a convincing soundstage. Naturally the Fives would have the best bass extension making it more of a full range speaker. The midrange is reproduced very well, being natural sounding and transparent to the source. The only thing I can't get past with them is a bit of a metallic or mechanical nature to their high frequency performance. It seems to be something I'm particularly sensitive to, since many people just rave about their detail. I prefer a smoother and more 'natural' sounding high end rather than the more analytical balance than I perceive the KEFs to have. Another way I'd describe it is having a bit of graininess to the highs instead of a more liquid sound. I've heard other speakers that have greater high end extension yet sound smoother and more musically balanced to me. Of course system matching comes into play here, so you should try to audition a pair with your electronics to form your own impressions. Unfortunately I find it usually comes down to individual preferences and which trade-offs we're willing to accept in any design. Hope this helps, and good luck in your search!
CDLehner
New member
I have 1s, and have heard Blade IIs (as well as some of the lower lines). While I don't agree with Bill, about a "metallic" sound, or graininess; I will say this. My guess is...Bill is a big soft-dome fan
Me too...and I've owned many speakers, that incorporated good ones. Perhaps Dynaudio's legendary Esotar2, being among the best. When I went from Contour S1.4s, to Confidence C1 Signatures; the very first thing that struck me, and dramatically...was how much more "air" and extension the C1 had (the main difference, IMO...between the 2 speakers; being an Esotec tweeter on the Contour, and Esotar2 on the Confidence). You would think, with more air...more extension; comes the risk for stridency and fatigue. NEVER; things stayed smooth as silk.
The Uni-Q...with its Aluminum Dome...is not going to sound quite like that; as "refined" and "smooth". But not everyone likes that "relaxed" presentation either; and it's far from, IMO...metallic and/or mechanical.
Bill is right; system matching is crucial though. Even though I am dangling my 1s for sale; it is not because they're not great. I'd recommend 3s or 5s...with the aforementioned caveats.
audio.bill
Active member
Chris - you make some excellent points! I do prefer the sound of some soft domes like the Esotars, but also great ribbons like those on the Magnepan 3.7i. I don't hear the same shortcoming with those that I do with the KEF's. I've also heard some superb metal domes but they're generally not aluminum, either titanium or beryllium. And some of those can be too 'hot' sounding to me unless they're combined with an amp that is softer or rolled off in the highs.
Face
New member
From what I've seen on the Q100 and Q900, the problem isn't KEF's Al tweeter, it's the midrange breakup not being suppressed enough. This could lead to coloration or harshness in the treble. It would be a shame if KEF made the same mistake in their Reference Series.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-q900-loudspeaker-measurements
Attachments
audio.bill
Active member
Face - I think that you may have hit on something there, as I notice the same quality across the KEF line including their highly respected LS50 speakers.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
I have never heard the Reference series, although I would love to. I can say that "harsh" is definitely not a word I would ever associate with KEF. I have always felt they were as smooth and inviting of a sounding speaker as there ever was. My LS50 are as smooth and as transparent of a speaker as I have ever heard.
One thing that I do recall back in my earlier audiophile days is that KEF was as demanding on amplifier and other components as any speaker around. A crappy Sony, for example, would sound terrible, while a 25w McIntosh tube amp would sing. Can't say if this is still the case but it certain was part of their needs in the past.
One thing that I do recall back in my earlier audiophile days is that KEF was as demanding on amplifier and other components as any speaker around. A crappy Sony, for example, would sound terrible, while a 25w McIntosh tube amp would sing. Can't say if this is still the case but it certain was part of their needs in the past.