Shoot out at the OK corral!

[DaveyF]

Yesterday, I had the great pleasure of welcoming fellow member and a'phile Andre Marc to my home. We had decided to do a shoot out ( ok, ( ok corral, pun) more like an AB test) between his pair of new KEF LS50's and my pair of SF GH's. Since my room is very small, we both felt that this would be an interesting test of how this well reviewed speaker can perform in a typical listening environment( Typical to what most user's room size would be), and against my slightly larger monitor.
Andre kindly brought over some speaker cable that we thought we would have to use...GED single runs terminated with bananas ( I have not heard of it) due to the fact that I run my GH's in bi-wire config....and the LS50's will NOT accept a bi-wire option. So, the test began....

To begin, we wanted to be sure that the only real variable were the speaker's themselves...and not any other gear. To this end, we realized ( after a little experimentation) that the GH's would NOT accept the banana type of end that the GED's were terminated with. So, we decided to stick with my cable ( Nordost Frey) and with the LS50's we simply doubled up the connections from the bi-wire end to the single connector on the plus and minus side of the KEF's.
After a brief listen to my GH's with my ss amp, we placed the LS50's into the system ( and on my SF stands). Andre listened first and commented that this was a VERY different presentation. I will let him expand on his thoughts.
I listened next and what struck me was the little LS50's were a little thin and sounded a little strained. However, overall I was impressed! The Kef's threw a wide soundstage and although depth was a little lacking ( more on this later), I thought the
high's were reasonably extended and the mids were clean although a little thin. We played a number of different CD's ( no vinyl as my vinyl rig is undergoing some MAJOR revisions and was out of the system). Included in the software was:

30 years Fidelity...Kirkelig Kulturkverksted compilation disc..track 3 Manen ( excellent test of female vocal) and Track 2 --Kangen om egret fed tornehamn by Kari Bremnes ( another excellent test of female vocal); Quiet Kenny ( Kenny Dorham) on the JVC XRCD, Miles Davis Sketches of Spain on Legacy ( great sounding CD and pressing, IMO) and Jethro Tull compilation ( Andre will have to tell you which pressing...can't find my note) and lastly, the Reference Recordings HDCD compilation....(track 6 Miles Davis "all Blues" and Track 3 Isaac Albeniz Festival Day in Seville).

After some more listening, we both wanted to see if the LS50's would benefit, like my SF's do, with the REL sub in the mix. To my ears, the little KEF's absolutely need a sub!! The sense of strain that I was hearing diminished, the stage width grew a little and the propensity to sound thin in the mids was less. This without me changing the sub blend that I had set up for the SF's ( wasn't going to do that as it took me over a month to get that right). Nonetheless, the blend wasn't too far out with the little KEF's and we both agreed the benefit was there. ( Andre being a little skeptical at first).

Next up, I suggested we listen to my tube amp with the KEF's ( An ARC D70 Mk2 with rolled in Winged C's). The speaker cable was again Nordost and again with the same hook up configuration. The little KEF's liked the ARC... playing the same tracks as on the ss amp, we were both treated to a nice spread of instruments on the stage and a nicely dynamic portrayal ( particularly considering the size of the KEF's driver's...we were NOT using the REL this time), with more depth portrayal. I have to agree with Andre, that this speaker for $1500 is a real steal. I have NOT heard another that competes at its price range...or for that matter up to $5000-! We then replaced the KEF's with my GH's and played back the same track (s). I will let Andre chime in here as to his thoughts...

 

[mep]

I listened next and what struck me was the little LS50's were a little thin and sounded a little strained. However, overall I was impressed!

If they sounded strained, you either had the volume up way too loud or your amp doesn't have enough grunt.

After some more listening, we both wanted to see if the LS50's would benefit, like my SF's do, with the REL sub in the mix. To my ears, the little KEF's absolutely need a sub!!

Big surprise. I have been trying to tell you guys that for months and all I got in return was negativity.

The sense of strain that I was hearing diminished, the stage width grew a little and the propensity to sound thin in the mids was less. This without me changing the sub blend that I had set up for the SF's ( wasn't going to do that as it took me over a month to get that right). Nonetheless, the blend wasn't too far out with the little KEF's and we both agreed the benefit was there. ( Andre being a little skeptical at first).

Next up, I suggested we listen to my tube amp withe the KEF's ( An ARC D70 Mk2 with rolled in Winged C's). The speaker cable was again Nordost and again with the same hook up configuration. The little KEF's liked the ARC... playing the same tracks as on the ss amp, we were both treated to a nice spread of instruments on the stage and a nicely dynamic portrayal ( particularly considering the size of the KEF's driver's...we were NOT using the REL this time), with more depth portrayal. I have to agree with Andre, that this speaker for $1500 is a real steal. I have NOT heard another that competes at its price range...or for that matter up to $5000-! We then replaced the KEF's with my GH's and played back the same track (s). I will let Andre chime in here as to his thoughts...

Would this be the part where Andre is supposed to tell us how wonderful your GH's sound, specially compared to the LS50s?

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Would this be the part where Andre is supposed to tell us how wonderful your GH's sound, specially compared to the LS50s?

That was cold Mark! Even for you!

 

[mep]

That was cold Mark! Even for you!

Sometimes the truth is cold John. That's why it's referred to as the cold, hard truth.

 

[DaveyF]

Was the amp strained, Mark....I don't think so. The ss amp puts out 250watts/ch and I have a VERY small room. I do NOT believe we were listening too loud.
" Would this be the part where Andre is supposed to tell us how wonderful your GH's sound, specially compared to the LS50's?" I will leave that up to him IF he so desires....
BUT I am NOT selling my GH's, let's put it that way.
Sometimes the truth is cold Mark. That's why it's referred to as the cold, hard truth.

 

[flez007]

I have owned both - for me it they belong to very different leagues, since as good as the LS50s are, the GH are a more "rounded" design overall.

 

[audioarcher]

I've heard the LS50's powered by a 200 wpc amp in a small room. They did sound and look a little strained at volumes north of 90 db. You can only expect so much out of a pair of 5 inch drivers.

 

[mep]

Was the amp strained, Mark....I don't think so. The ss amp puts out 250watts/ch and I have a VERY small room. I do NOT believe we were listening too loud.
" Would this be the part where Andre is supposed to tell us how wonderful your GH's sound, specially compared to the LS50's?" I will leave that up to him IF he so desires....
BUT I am NOT selling my GH's, let's put it that way.
Sometimes the truth is cold Mark. That's why it's referred to as the cold, hard truth.

Davey-I have never heard your speakers and therefore I have no idea what they sound like. I could be wrong, but I thought the earlier SF speakers were anything but neutral devices and they were voiced to be warm and romantic sounding. If that is true and one gets used to that type of presentation, speakers that suffer no such colorations will not sound as good to your ears unless you recalibrate your internal standards for what is truly more neutral and accurate to the source. The real truth could be that your SF speakers are just superior sounding speakers compared to the LS50s. I honestly don't know.

 

[Steve Williams]

I've been under the impression that Andre prefers not to use subs with his Kef LS50's

 

[mep]

I've heard the LS50's powered by a 200 wpc amp in a small room. They did sound and look a little strained at volumes north of 90 db. You can only expect so much out of a pair of 5 inch drivers.

If the speakers "looked a little strained," I assume you were playing vinyl through them and you could see the cones flapping in the breeze from the turntable setup. I only know how the LS50s sound in my room with my gear and my four subs. "Strained" isn't a word that comes to mind.

 

[mep]

I've been under the impression that Andre prefers not to use subs with his Kef LS50's

He never tried them with a sub Steve. Andre is not a fan of subs. He thinks they are too much work to setup correctly and that they will still never blend with the main speakers.

 

[Steve Williams]

He never tried them with a sub Steve. Andre is not a fan of subs. He thinks they are too much work to setup correctly and that they will still never blend with the main speakers.

I'd be interested in hearing what Andre thought of listening with the sub

 

[audioarcher]

If the speakers "looked a little strained," I assume you were playing vinyl through them and you could see the cones flapping in the breeze from the turntable setup. I only know how the LS50s sound in my room with my gear and my four subs. "Strained" isn't a word that comes to mind.

Your assumption is wrong. Digital was the source. I could see the cones flexing a little in the middle.

 

[TBone]

Sometimes the truth is cold

The real truth could be that your SF speakers are just superior sounding speakers compared to the LS50s. I honestly don't know.

sounds like your "the cold hard truth" is butt hot air ...

tb1

 

[mep]

I just read the review of the SF GH speakers from 1992 in Stereophile. These speakers cost $9K in 1992 so they should sound damn good. I thought the review was excellent by the way.

 

[mep]

sounds like your "the cold hard truth" is butt hot air ...

tb1

How so? I'm making no claims that the LS50 is a better sounding speaker than the SF GH. I already said I had never heard them which means I can't compare them. The GH's were $9K in 1992 money and we are now comparing them against a $1500 pair of speakers bought with 2013 money.

 

[mep]

Your assumption is wrong. Digital was the source. I could see the cones flexing a little in the middle.

Damn! First time today, but I knew it wouldn't last. I'll go for two mistakes today-it was probably some lousy digital that was making the speakers cringe.

 

[DaveyF]

Guys, this review is in NO WAY meant to demean the LS50's. I believe and I did say this, that the LS50's are an impressive speaker. They are an amazing deal at their asking price. I would NOT hesitate for a second to highly recommend them to any one asking about speakers in the $3-5K range. However, the question really is...and I believe Andre and I are on the same page with this...is it likely that a typical user is going to spring good money for an appropriate sub given the pricing platform of the LS50. I do NOT think that is likely. Simply by adding an inexpensive and atypical HT sub would NOT be beneficial given the quality of these speakers. Then you have to take the time and effort to match the sub to the mains, which again, I suspect for the "typical" user isn't going to be be something that a) they want to do and b) they have the experience necessary to do.
As Mark correctly points out, the GH's were a FAR more pricey speaker in their day...so IMO to expect a LOT more from them is to be expected.
KEF has a winner on their hands....no doubt, BUT..I think that this winner has to be taken into context. As Andre was suggesting, a slightly larger version of the LS50 with the same mid/tweet driver and in a larger cabinet with a large bass driver with the same technology as applied to the LS50 would be another winner. Perhaps, this is next for KEF....If so, it could be a very STRONG contender in the sub $20K level, IMHO.

 

[DaveyF]

I'd be interested in hearing what Andre thought of listening with the sub

Steve, I hope Andre will chime in here.

 

[mep]

Guys, this review is in NO WAY meant to demean the LS50's. I believe and I did say this, that the LS50's are an impressive speaker. They are an amazing deal at their asking price. I would NOT hesitate for a second to highly recommend them to any one asking about speakers in the $3-5K range. However, the question really is...and I believe Andre and I are on the same page with this...is it likely that a typical user is going to spring good money for an appropriate sub given the pricing platform of the LS50. I do NOT think that is likely. Simply by adding an inexpensive and atypical HT sub would NOT be beneficial given the quality of these speakers. Then you have to take the time and effort to match the sub to the mains, which again, I suspect for the "typical" user isn't going to be be something that a) they want to do and b) they have the experience necessary to do.
As Mark correctly points out, the GH's were a FAR more pricey speaker in their day...so IMO to expect a LOT more from them is to be expected.
KEF has a winner on their hands....no doubt, BUT..I think that this winner has to be taken into context. As Andre was suggesting, a slightly larger version of the LS50 with the same mid/tweet driver and in a larger cabinet with a large bass driver with the same technology as applied to the LS50 would be another winner. Perhaps, this is next for KEF....If so, it could be a very STRONG contender in the sub $20K level, IMHO.

Except for "slightly larger version,' you are coming very close to describing the KEF Blade. I do believe that one of the prime ingredients in the LS50 successful recipe is the very small, well designed and damped enclosure. I'm not so sure you can scale up the size of that enclosure and retain the magic.