LS-50 Speakers (Passive)

I don't think the LS50s have changed.  KEF tries to save money like every other manufacturers: by achieving economies of scale.
What I believe is that the new Q150s are very close to the LS50s.  So the initial LS50 development investment will continue to pay off for years to come.
By the way, the LS 50s are outstanding in the midrange and up - outstanding soundstage and imaging - a great speaker, unique.
I have the ELAC UB5s now, replacing the LS50s.  The Elacs are somewhat a me too product, outstanding for the money, very close to the LS50s, but not as refined imho.  However, the bass (quality, evenness) on the ELAC is absolutely way better than on the LS50s...
So take your pick... a matter of taste.

You don't have to "take your pick" if you use the LS50s with a pair of subs.  I highly recommend something like the Velodyne SMS-1 bass manager that provides acoustic room correction for subs and is helpful for integrating the LS50s with the subs.

db

db, you may be right, but with bass management as you say.  I personally like to let the main speakers play what it was designed to play.  In other words, I crossover to my sub naturally at the point where the mains can't no longer output, and keep the use of the sub to a minimum.

ELAC UB5s are 1/3 the price of the LS50s. If you think they are equivalent, that makes the ELACs the bargain of the century.

I have a pair of UB5s, as well as a pair of ~1978 Chartwell LS3/5As. I should compare them some time.

I have both the Elac UB5 and LS50s.  I also have a pair of Totem Hawk as reference.   In my room and with my modest marantz integrated, The UB5s are coming really close to the LS50s in terms of imaging/soundstage, clarity, details.  The LS50s develop more the midrange without being forward, while the UB5s are little less refined and more forward.
The UB5s bass -without the use of equalization or crossovers at mid-bass frequency- are more even and refined.
That's just my take on things!