2. speakers
  3. 192137-24

B&W 705s3 vs Kef Meta R3

I was at Magnolia the other day and out of curiosity, I asked the salesman to play these 2 speakers back to back.  I really couldn't believe how muffled the Metas were compared to the Bowers.  I then compared other bigger models of each and heard the same sound signature.  What was the problem here?  I've owned a ton of different speakers and never heard quite a contrast.  I should add that I am biased towards Kef.

 

Has anyone else out there compared these 2 lines in a real world setting? 

128x128b_limo
james633
1,047 posts
 

I had the same experience with Kef at Best Buy on several demos (reference 3, blade 2). Lack of detail in the upper mids and highs…. Went to a dealer to hear the Blade 2 and thought they sounded the same with a lack of detail. I have crossed Kef off my list after my demos. 

audiotroy's avatar
audiotroy
3,827 posts
 

James the kef blades are amazing what were the hooked up to?

dynamiclinearity
276 posts
 

I've heard KEF speakers, including early KEF 50s and they don't sound the way you described them. You should at least try more auditions elsewhere if possible.

mofojo
2,304 posts
 

I had KEF 201/2 for a couple years. Nothing muddy about them. Almost too detailed if that’s a thing. They were pretty awesome although fairly ruthless with less than stellar recordings. 

yyzsantabarbara
4,918 posts
 

KEF has a lot of detail. More than most speakers and something some have said as being a negative on the KEF lineup. Though not as detailed as Beryllium or Zylon cone drivers that I have heard.

My old KEF LS50 META was more detailed than the Magnepan LRS+ but I liked the LRS+ more for the wall of sound effect.

 

More to discover