KEF Blade Meta One

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. 

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.

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. 

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.

8 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

Sonic sunglasses 👓 🕶 😎 

Sunglasses are optical tone controls.  😎

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.

4 hours ago, Axiom05 said:

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.

Yeah.  KEF recommends:

A- Rear of speaker to front wall:  225mm (9")!!!

B- Side of speaker to side wall:  1m (36")

W- Distance between speakers:  2-3m (6-10 feet)

D- Centerline distance to MLP:  1-1.2 x W

The most curious item is how small A is but that may be due to the controlled directivity.  I am planning to experiment with that as I now have them about 36" from the front wall.

The others are not remarkable although Floyd Toole told me that he expected problems with "B."  Turns out that it was not a problem for me perhaps because my entire setup is off center in the room resulting in different measures for "B" on each side.

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

2 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Floyd Toole told me that he expected problems with "B." Side of speaker to side wall:  1m (36")

Did he give any explanation?

Not with the 36" but with the much smaller distance I was initially using.

14 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Kal did mention in room measurements were done and input from IIRC JA and Toole.

I did not mention JA in this context and my interaction with Floyd on this was casual (although I always appreciate their comments).

I found this old measurement with Omnimic from one speaker on HF axis at 1m (not from listening position) and prior to the apartment renovations.  I cannot recall exactly where it was situated and I do not have the info on the averaging or smoothing in effect.   The trough in the 100-200Hz range is now corrected with DL.

If/when there is time and inclination, I would like to do more.

3 hours ago, semente said:

This diagram by Neumann indicates that the worst position for the woofer is distanced between 0.80m and 2.00m (bottom left table) from the front wall (it also shows the advantage of using subwoofers in minimising SBIR effects):

This diagram predicts results from a speaker which emits sound only from its front surface.  This is not the case for the Blades which emit bass from the sides as well as the rear-directed ports.  

2 minutes ago, semente said:

 

Below 80Hz the speaker acts as an omni, that includes ports and side woofers.

Above 80Hz the ports are no longer operating.

You do have the back-to-back woofers operating as omnis for most of their operating range, which goes up to 300Hz.

I think that the principle still applies but happy to be corrected.

Agreed.  The ports are down about 10dB at 80Hz but not completely out and the side-mounted woofers are crossed over at about 400Hz.