KEF Blade Meta One

Does anyone own these or heard them? I was intrigued by Tonepub's review saying they were the nearest box speakers he'd heard to Quad ESL57. The KEF's also measure incredibly. 

Just shows to go ya how different people react differently.  I am not discounting the comments of @krass but they are quite the opposite of mine (although I do agree with his positive response to Kaya).  In situations like this, it would be enlightening to know more about the conditions of the audition, the program content and the specifics of "more open" and "natural."  Better yet would be for us to sit, side-by-side.

I auditioned the Blade 2 Metas in my own home and, subsequently, bought them.  And while I prize "more open" and "natural," there can be too much of even such good things. 

I used the H590 on my Blades and found them uninvolving below 90 db, In fact I was getting ready to move on, but I switched to more powerful monoblocs, MC611's and the difference was instant. The Blades will play full range with average power, but if we want to hear how dynamic they are a bit of juice is required. 

On 8/5/2023 at 4:37 PM, hvbias said:

Does anyone own these or heard them? I was intrigued by Tonepub's review saying they were the nearest box speakers he'd heard to Quad ESL57. The KEF's also measure incredibly. 

On 8/6/2023 at 2:24 PM, krass said:

I did an extensive demo with the Blade 2 version. That might not be a good benchmark to comment on the Blade 1s, but I found the Blade 2s a bit disappointing (flat, dull, ‘closed’ midrange) when driven by Hegel 590 and Linn Klimax. I certainly wouldn’t relate their sound to anything like electrostatics, in general (In general I love electrostatics by the way).

 

I moved on to Vivid Audio (Kaya) & Wilson (Sabrina) which I much preferred, being more open & in my opinion natural sounding.

On 8/6/2023 at 3:06 PM, Kal Rubinson said:

Just shows to go ya how different people react differently.  I am not discounting the comments of @krass but they are quite the opposite of mine (although I do agree with his positive response to Kaya).  In situations like this, it would be enlightening to know more about the conditions of the audition, the program content and the specifics of "more open" and "natural."  Better yet would be for us to sit, side-by-side.

 

I auditioned the Blade 2 Metas in my own home and, subsequently, bought them.  And while I prize "more open" and "natural," there can be too much of even such good things. 

6 hours ago, steve59 said:

I used the H590 on my Blades and found them uninvolving below 90 db, In fact I was getting ready to move on, but I switched to more powerful monoblocs, MC611's and the difference was instant. The Blades will play full range with average power, but if we want to hear how dynamic they are a bit of juice is required. 

I am interested in replacing Snell Type A III, and have Blades on my shortlist. I haven't yet heard them.

I was provoked to post by OP reference to ESL57. I have a pair of ESL57 I picked up at auction. They are in working order - all panels OK.

I hooked up the ESL57s to my main system only recently. My usual speakers, Snell Type A III, are gloriously open. They move a lot of air. They have oomph and bass subject to positioning etc. In comparison the ESL57 remind me of my old Linn Kabers. Not resolving. Requiring steep toe-in to create any sort of soundstage. No real resolution anywhere - especially in the bass - not compared to the Snells anyway. Perhaps their SQ would be enhanced significantly by refurb. – but I doubt it.

So if the Blades are like ESL57s, I'm out! But I think that's probably unlikely. I expect Blades are even more resolving than my Snell Type A III and good at soundstage - but may lack the "character" I have grown to love. The Snells can be mercilessly forward with any digital edge and perhaps the Blades might be kinder. £20-30k is a lot of money for that kind of delta.

I am running the Snells vertically bi-amped off Klimax Twins at this time. The Twins struggle with the Snell's 12" woofers at high volume. By "struggle" I mean the fans come on - and if I'm really enjoying myself with abandon - a Twin has cut out a couple of times (too much current drawn - resets no problem). Michael from Lyric HiFi in Belfast is selling Blade 2s with Klimax Solos as a system (see YT). He says fans coming on is what they're supposed to do - true - but still a distraction and I don't like it.

If I were impulsive I'd buy Blades, and Hegel H30/A - a common pairing seen online. Since I am so fond of vertical bi-amping, what I would really love is 2 x Electrocompaniet AW 800 M with their awesome bi-amp facility. Fantastically expensive. Tbh I might buy Blades subject to audition hoping for the best with the Klimax Twins - and look towards Appollon as Plan B if my funds don't reach Hegel / Electrocompaniet. (I want to buy an expensive turntable too.)

I'd love someone to tell me Blade 1s would be pretty much as easy to drive as Blade 2s. Unlikely I guess - but by how much wrt Klimax Twins? Anyway - aren't the Blade 2s supposed to be better than Blade 1s?

I bought my ESL57 about 15 years ago, they were working and sounding ok. After having them rebuilt by Wayne Picquet they sounded completely different, I have never heard a more realistic midrange than any other speaker save for one massive bespoke system with a constant directivty waveguide using TAD TD4001 compression drivers. To date they're the only two speakers I've heard that remind me most like what I hear at classical solo piano, chamber music, and symphonies when it comes to instrument timbre/realism. They just can't do symphony level dynamics or soundstage which is why I want a second system, but I'll never sell the ESL57.

On my drive back from work everyday I'm literally thinking about what music I am going to come back to listen to after dinner, and that is still happening after about 13 years of their refurbishment. 

I have been chasing that ever since, owned and sold B&W, Maggies, Harbeth, Falcon LS3/5a, and DIY ATC (by someone else).

The Blade 1 and Blade 2 are Identical except the B2 is smaller with smaller woofers for smaller rooms. The Blade meta are the new, upgraded version for the B 1 & B2. I haven't heard the Blade meta yet so can't speak to the difference yet. I can say going from the H590 to the MC611's really opened up the speakers.

51 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

 

 

 

I am interested in replacing Snell Type A III, and have Blades on my shortlist. I haven't yet heard them.

 

I was provoked to post by OP reference to ESL57. I have a pair of ESL57 I picked up at auction. They are in working order - all panels OK.

 

I hooked up the ESL57s to my main system only recently. My usual speakers, Snell Type A III, are gloriously open. They move a lot of air. They have oomph and bass subject to positioning etc. In comparison the ESL57 remind me of my old Linn Kabers. Not resolving. Requiring steep toe-in to create any sort of soundstage. No real resolution anywhere - especially in the bass - not compared to the Snells anyway. Perhaps their SQ would be enhanced significantly by refurb. – but I doubt it.

 

So if the Blades are like ESL57s, I'm out! But I think that's probably unlikely. I expect Blades are even more resolving than my Snell Type A III and good at soundstage - but may lack the "character" I have grown to love. The Snells can be mercilessly forward with any digital edge and perhaps the Blades might be kinder. £20-30k is a lot of money for that kind of delta.

 

I am running the Snells vertically bi-amped off Klimax Twins at this time. The Twins struggle with the Snell's 12" woofers at high volume. By "struggle" I mean the fans come on - and if I'm really enjoying myself with abandon - a Twin has cut out a couple of times (too much current drawn - resets no problem). Michael from Lyric HiFi in Belfast is selling Blade 2s with Klimax Solos as a system (see YT). He says fans coming on is what they're supposed to do - true - but still a distraction and I don't like it.

 

If I were impulsive I'd buy Blades, and Hegel H30/A - a common pairing seen online. Since I am so fond of vertical bi-amping, what I would really love is 2 x Electrocompaniet AW 800 M with their awesome bi-amp facility. Fantastically expensive. Tbh I might buy Blades subject to audition hoping for the best with the Klimax Twins - and look towards Appollon as Plan B if my funds don't reach Hegel / Electrocompaniet. (I want to buy an expensive turntable too.)

 

I'd love someone to tell me Blade 1s would be pretty much as easy to drive as Blade 2s. Unlikely I guess - but by how much wrt Klimax Twins? Anyway - aren't the Blade 2s supposed to be better than Blade 1s?

Too many variables!  There is no one (imho) who can tell you with authority if you will be pleased with the Blades 1 or 2, Meta or not.  Even the word "character" is a hot button term that is used equally with disdain or with approval.  And the amp issue is secondary since (imho, again) amps should be transparent and neutral.  Pick a suitable one after you have determined your speaker choice.  Sorry not to have answers for you.

45 minutes ago, steve59 said:

the MC611's really opened up the speakers.

27 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

the amp issue is secondary since (imho, again) amps should be transparent and neutral.  Pick a suitable one after you have determined your speaker choice.

My "current dumping" Quad 909s (DADA upgrades) are respected widely even by our "scientific" friends. They handle the Snell 12" woofers no problem. The Twins are definitely better SQ-wise. I tried horizontally bi-amping with a Twin on HF and a Quad 909 on LF. No power issues at all. But the SQ not there: you could hear the LF "confusion" easily. But OK - let's say sig. expenditure amps will all be "transparent and neutral". My suspicion is that Blades will like power - and that I have to factor that probability and accompanying financial implications into my overall strategy including auditioning. Blade 2s have 4 x 6" woofers and Blade 1s 4 x 9" woofers. I doubt any Blades will want W rationing. I know different animals but I might even consider a Klipsch or another sensitive speaker. So yeah - variables, variables. I kept my remarks to Blade issues given the newly revived thread. I'll keep my eye on it to see what I can learn.

27 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Sorry not to have answers for you.

Not at all. Thanks for replying

On 8/6/2023 at 11:24 PM, krass said:

I did an extensive demo with the Blade 2 version.

I moved on to Vivid Audio (Kaya) & Wilson (Sabrina) which I much preferred, being more open & in my opinion natural sounding.

I auditioned the Blades one (not meta) but moved on to Vivid G2 and now G2 Series 2.

I did like the Blades very much

On 8/7/2023 at 12:06 AM, Kal Rubinson said:

I auditioned the Blade 2 Metas in my own home and, subsequently, bought them.  And while I prize "more open" and "natural," there can be too much of even such good things. 

Interesting comment Kal, can a piano sound too naturally like a piano ?...or perhaps naturalness in one area can come with trade-offs in other areas?

What was it that grabbed you about the Blade 2 metas that struck you as just the right amount of naturalness and openess beyond which it becomes undesirable ?

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Interesting comment Kal, can a piano sound too naturally like a piano ?...or perhaps naturalness in one area can come with trade-offs in other areas?

Indeed.  It is not that a piano can sound too natural but that a component can alter the sound such that it alters the sound in such a way that some (or even many) believe to be an enhancement of piano recordings.  Such a coloration is likely to not do be as "complementary" to other instruments or voices but, despite that, it many appeal to some listeners.

2 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

What was it that grabbed you about the Blade 2 metas that struck you as just the right amount of naturalness and openess beyond which it becomes undesirable ?

I will refer you to what I wrote in my review but will add that I do not believe that any coloration is beneficial and prefer transparency.  There's a wide range of pianos (and other instruments) and they should sound different and not homogenized.  The Blade 2s achieve that and the measurements (by JA and, also, in my room) confirm it.  I would not trust my ears without the support of the measurements. 

2 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Indeed.  It is not that a piano can sound too natural but that a component can alter the sound such that it alters the sound in such a way that some (or even many) believe to be an enhancement of piano recordings.  Such a coloration is likely to not do be as "complementary" to other instruments or voices but, despite that, it many appeal to some listeners.

I will refer you to what I wrote in my review but will add that I do not believe that any coloration is beneficial and prefer transparency.  There's a wide range of pianos (and other instruments) and they should sound different and not homogenized.  The Blade 2s achieve that and the measurements (by JA and, also, in my room) confirm it.  I would not trust my ears without the support of the measurements. 

I agree then, epistemic difficulties aside, there can not be too much naturalness (or openness) if that is one's goal - but as you say some folks prefer a coloration that sounds good to them, describing it as more natural (enhanced). The problem is when creating a color cast , as beautiful as it may be, you must like it everywhere unless you can apply it selectively

6 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I agree then, epistemic difficulties aside, there can not be too much naturalness (or openness) if that is one's goal - but as you say some folks prefer a coloration that sounds good to them, describing it as more natural (enhanced). The problem is when creating a color cast , as beautiful as it may be, you must like it everywhere unless you can apply it selectively

 

I keep falling back on the analogy to rose-colored glasses.

Yes, I'm not comparing build competence between the h590 or mc611, only that the blades benefit from more power. I remember reading an early Blade demo that I believe was set up by KEF and they used 4 JC1 parasound monoblock amps to drive a pair of speakers. Bit of a hint the company recommends lots of juice for the speakers.

2 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

I keep falling back on the analogy to rose-colored glasses.

Sonic sunglasses 👓 🕶 😎 

8 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Sonic sunglasses 👓 🕶 😎 

Sunglasses are optical tone controls.  😎

wow. I'll follow up when I can polish up my reply.

On 9/8/2024 at 2:49 PM, Iving said:

I am interested in replacing Snell Type A III, and have Blades on my shortlist. I haven't yet heard them.

Me neither, although I’ve owned other KEF models in the past. I loved my bi-amped Snell Type A’s in the last century before I converted to active speakers: Meridian’s new DSP9 today, which I consider to be extremely transparent and neutral. And I’ve tweaked sources to the point where I don’t hear them anymore.

30 minutes ago, Meridimac said:

Me neither, although I’ve owned other KEF models in the past. I loved my bi-amped Snell Type A’s in the last century before I converted to active speakers: Meridian’s new DSP9 today, which I consider to be extremely transparent and neutral. And I’ve tweaked sources to the point where I don’t hear them anymore.

nice

In "character" (as I mean it anyway) DSP9 (Active) seemingly belonging to the "modern curve" family featuring also likes of Blade and Kaya (Passive) ... in contrast to "vintage retro" family such as ATC (Active) and Klipsch, Tannoy, JBL (Passive)

Some speakers, with good reports, I have ruled out if no analogue-thru option, as it is subjectively important to me that records are an all-analogue experience.

DSP9 are £60k. But then a couple of Hegel H30As to vertically bi-amp Blade 2s nicely would come in at (£17k x 2) + £22k = £56k. Call that £64k if Blade 1s.

Electrostatics another family as OP

I may go to the UK Hi-Fi Show at Ascot 21/22 Sept. - see what I can soak in. I think all Brands mentioned in this post are there ... except Meridian!

Yes, DSP9 will accept an analog source (although I use AES/EBU). Yes, they are curvy and narrow around the drivers to minimize cabinet diffraction. Yes, with four DACs and 1,260 watts built-in, they are competitively priced considering the cost of truly excellent electronics.
 

Meridian is confirmed as one the exhibitors at this year’s UK Audio Show on 5th/6th October, 2024, at Staverton Park Hotel & Golf Club, Daventry Road, Staverton, Daventry, Northampton, NN11 6JT along with Focal and others, but I don’t see KEF.

1 hour ago, Meridimac said:

Meridian is confirmed as one the exhibitors at this year’s UK Audio Show on 5th/6th October, 2024, at Staverton Park Hotel & Golf Club, Daventry Road, Staverton, Daventry, Northampton, NN11 6JT along with Focal and others, but I don’t see KEF.

Great info many thanks

On 9/8/2024 at 11:48 PM, Kal Rubinson said:

Too many variables! 

The biggest variable for listening to a pair of KEF Blades (all generations) is the room. They have a specific way of interacting with the tonality of the room so people perceiving them as neutral and those describing them as dull can be both right at the same time. It very much depends on the given reverberation characteristics of the room with open spaces, ´thin-sounding´ or broad-band damped rooms being advantageous. 

My guess would be this has to do with the directivity pattern which is not the same over the relevant frequency band. 

I do agree that their unusual construction, specifically with regard to the placement and orientation of the four large drivers whose FR extends up into the midrange, makes placement a challenge.  It took me months of experimentation to get my system to where I like it but I am not convinced that it is optimum yet.  OTOH, the placement of those drives and of their loading ports also provides for bass sources from 12" to 50" off the floor which certainly makes their interaction with vertical and oblique modes different from the vast majority of speakers.

So, I think it is this, rather than directivity per se, that makes setup not difficult but different.

45 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

I do agree that their unusual construction, specifically with regard to the placement and orientation of the four large drivers whose FR extends up into the midrange, makes placement a challenge.  It took me months of experimentation to get my system to where I like it but I am not convinced that it is optimum yet.  OTOH, the placement of those drives and of their loading ports also provides for bass sources from 12" to 50" off the floor which certainly makes their interaction with vertical and oblique modes different from the vast majority of speakers.

 

So, I think it is this, rather than directivity per se, that makes setup not difficult but different.

Placement of the woofers within the room is something that has always concerned me with the Blades. In a narrow room, where one side of the speaker could be quite near the side wall, I suspect there could be some issues. Unfortunately, there is no way to know w/o actually trying them in one's own room. I know low frequencies are omnidirectional, but I would imagine that some unpredictable "loading" wrt the side wall could occur. My Studio2's are only around 14" from the side wall which seems a bit close for the side firing woofers and could also result in some lower midrange coloration.

4 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

So, I think it is this, rather than directivity per se, that makes setup not difficult but different.

That makes sense to me. I wouldn't have anticipated the Blades (which I have auditioned) to be particularly difficult to setup due to "directivity" issues. or to lend themselves to certain 'sounding rooms'.

I would also expect reverberation (RT60) measured in a smallish room with non-diffuse sound-field to be problematic in this context, being more comfortable talking about early and late reflections and modal resonances wrt setup. That said I am interested in things like decay spectrograms and things that may affect them rather than RT60 per se