KEF Meta speakers vs non meta

I have the Reference 1 (non-meta) and have heard the Meta version in two different systems at friend's houses.  There was nothing about the Meta that made me wish I had it.  Without trying them in my system, it's hard to say if they'd be any better, but I have listened to both friend's systems a number of times with other speakers.  One friend sold his Metas.  The other friend was considering buying them and gave them a home tryout but ended up keeping his Joseph Audio Pulsar Graphenes.  Honestly, I think the whole "Meta" thing is great marketing by KEF.

I only had the LS50 and LS50 Meta. The Meta sounded better. Better clarity for sure. Maybe that was it, I do not remember all the particulars now. I do remember thinking that this was a nice upgrade.

My system was very revealing at that time so maybe that was a factor in me noticing the differences.

I was initially planning on getting the original Kef Ref 1 but the LS50 Meta and the KC62 sub seemed as good in my small room. The only speaker I liked more in the space was the Magnepan LRS+ with the KC62. The LS50 Meta was better with respect to clarity and detail but the wall of sound of the LRS+ was favored by me.

I have ls50s and ls50 metas.  The metas are a notch or two better. 

I also have the Reference 5’s non meta and was able to hear the Reference 3’s but not the. 5’s. We have a new dealer here and they are having some an event tomorrow evening and a KEF Rep is supposed to be there, so I hope to ask him a bunch of questions.

Curiousjim-I'd appreciate an update on what you learn and hear at the KEF event!