Are the KEF Blade/Blade 2 Metas a Significant Upgrade from Blade?


I’ve enjoyed my KEF Blade 2 for over 5 years. Just wondering if anyone has compared the Blade/2 Metas to the original and how significant an upgrade in sound observed. With 65 yo ears improving on excellent is not always a sure thing. Thanks so much!

audiobrian

My opinion of passive is that they are being used as ports and are not connected up to the speaker terminals. But I guess with these speakers they are all connected.

ozzy

KR reviewed the blade 2 meta's . I don't understand what he is trying to say in this review. He comments that he never missed surround sound while listening to the blade 2 meta? Was that line for his multi channel followers, IDK the comparison at the end saying sometimes he would wake in the morning and not be able to hear which pair of speakers was left connected to be followed by saying he misses the blades now that they're gone make no sense? If his hearing has deteriorated to the point he can't tell 2 different brands apart maybe he's not qualified to be giving listening reviews anymore? 

Strange review in general, especially as you note his comparisons. As mentioned before, not comparing the Metas to Loudspeaker of the Year 2015, the original Blade 2, is a glaring omission.

 

Any of you Blades owners use 2 stereo amps with Blades. That is 1 amp on the L and R high frequency speaker connection and a second stereo amp for the L and R woofers.

I have an amp that I really like, the KRELL 175XD, but I want to have more power  for the Blades (when I get it) than that amp delivers. I was wondering if getting a KRELL 300XD just for the woofers would be similar to getting a very powerful amp that can double from 8-4-2 Ohm. 

Getting a second KRELL amp would be cheaper than the other 'super amp' options I was considering.