LS50 Meta vs LS50 with EQ

[Piranesi]

As far as I'm aware, the metamaterial plate in the new LS50 Metas aims to reduce a peak in the mid-highs and reduce rearward reflections. Would there be any substantial difference between that and simply EQing the older (and cheaper!) LS50s?

 

[SS55]

I have the LS50 and had a chance to compare the LS50 Meta in my room and do a back to back comparison. Once you EQ the LS50 they are as good as Meta. Even without the EQ
I had to really focus on certain aspects of a song to notice any difference. There were times when I forgot which one was playing. It's definitely not a night and day difference unless you are a trained listener. Hence I decided not to pay extra for the Meta.

 

[NeoZs99]

Both will require a sub.. and s sub will always add high pass/placement issues. Stretch the budget a bit go for a kh310

 

[phoenixdogfan]

I have the LS50 and had a chance to compare the LS50 Meta in my room and do a back to back comparison. Once you EQ the LS50 they are as good as Meta. Even without the EQ
I had to really focus on certain aspects of a song to notice any difference. There were times when I forgot which one was playing. It's definitely not a night and day difference unless you are a trained listener. Hence I decided not to pay extra for the Meta.

I disagree. I own both the OG LS 50s and the Metas. I've lived with the originals since 2015, and bought the Metas this April.

I use Maiky76's eq on both speakers, and to my ears the Metas simply sound better. Much better. Smoother and more relaxed. I use (have used) both with an SB2000 sub crossed over at 100 hz, and with Dirac Live. My ancillary equipent is an Octo DAC 8 Pro, and a Puri Eval 1 Eigentact amplifer.

To my ears, the Metas are stunning with this set up. I've moved the OG LS 50s to surround duty. They sounded very good with Maiky's eq, and Dirac Live correction mated to the SB 2000, but not as good the Metas in the same set up.

Other people may hear it differently, but for me these speakers in my small listening space, playing at moderate volumes (l.t. 90 db) are about as good as anything I've heard, and I've been an audiophile for 47 years.

 

[Ata]

This.

I had auditioned KEF LS50s about 3 years ago and could not understand what all the fuss about them was. KEF R300s were head and shoulders above and beyond.

A few months back, I auditioned, in the same room in the same shop, LS50Ms and R3s. While R3s are arguably the better speaker, the subjective difference was very small, and with the price difference I could buy a great sub (SVS SB-1000 Pro). Raw (no EQ) they sound great, and with REW-derived manual convolution filter or automated Dirac room correction I grin every time I hear the setup.

 

[aarons915]

I disagree. I own both the OG LS 50s and the Metas. I've lived with the originals since 2015, and bought the Metas this April.

I use Maiky76's eq on both speakers, and to my ears the Metas simply sound better. Much better. Smoother and more relaxed. I use (have used) both with an SB2000 sub crossed over at 100 hz, and with Dirac Live. My ancillary equipent is an Octo DAC 8 Pro, and a Puri Eval 1 Eigentact amplifer.

To my ears, the Metas are stunning with this set up. I've moved the OG LS 50s to surround duty. They sounded very good with Maiky's eq, and Dirac Live correction mated to the SB 2000, but not as good the Metas in the same set up.

Other people may hear it differently, but for me these speakers in my small listening space, playing at moderate volumes (l.t. 90 db) are about as good as anything I've heard, and I've been an audiophile for 47 years.

I agree the meta are very neutral on their own but the only thing I'd caution is using Maiky's EQ since it's based on the ASR measurements and for some reason doesn't show the extra 2k energy present in most measurements, the result is that they will still have some brightness/harshness and I would expect the meta to sound better. I've been using the Soundstage measurements to EQ from and they sound very neutral after EQ, I plan on trying the meta out at some point and comparing them with my soundstage EQ to see how much difference exists.

 

[Ata]

I suspect individual speakers of the same make and model can easily be +- 1db in their FR due to minor driver and material variations, though I have not seen anyone confirm that scientifically.

So I would trust more, and will do when time permits, my own windowed measurements to allow individual EQ of the units I own.

 

[aarons915]

I suspect individual speakers of the same make and model can easily be +- 1db in their FR due to minor driver and material variations, though I have not seen anyone confirm that scientifically.

So I would trust more, and will do when time permits, my own windowed measurements to allow individual EQ of the units I own.

That's not a bad idea, I still use anechoic measurements to EQ from but I make sure the changes I make are positively reflected in the in-room response since it matches the early reflections curve so closely. With the LS50 I get a massive peak in the 2k area(I've had 4 different pairs at various times measure similarly) so any EQ on them needs to EQ that region by at least 2db.

 

[MarkWinston]

I own the original LS50 and I borrowed my brother in law's Metas for a week because I wanted to AB them in my own house. Didnt have to, difference was quite huge in terms of body, transparency and clarity, all goin to the Metas. AB-ed them to be sure and back to back the difference was even bigger. Soundstage and instrument separation were noticebly different, I have not eq-ed my LS50 but I dont think even after EQ-ing them would put it on par with the Metas in certain important aspects. There are somethings you just cant get by eq-ing. I am now itching for the Metas but cant quite afford it yet. This is from someone that owns the LS50 for more than 3 years now. Or I might just save up more and get the Wireless 2 and be done with because I wont need to splurge on an amp that goin to cost at least twice as much as the Metas to bring the best out of it.

 

[muad]

I own the original LS50 and I borrowed my brother in law's Metas for a week because I wanted to AB them in my own house. Didnt have to, difference was quite huge in terms of body, transparency and clarity, all goin to the Metas. AB-ed them to be sure and back to back the difference was even bigger. Soundstage and instrument separation were noticebly different, I have not eq-ed my LS50 but I dont think even after EQ-ing them would put it on par with the Metas in certain important aspects. There are somethings you just cant get by eq-ing. I am now itching for the Metas but cant quite afford it yet. This is from someone that owns the LS50 for more than 3 years now. Or I might just save up more and get the Wireless 2 and be done with because I wont need to splurge on an amp that goin to cost at least twice as much as the Metas to bring the best out of it.

You don't need an expensive amp for the ls50s. A $500 hypex is plenty of power for them, and has no problems with impedance.

I would avoid the wireless version... KEF doesn't have a great track record with their electronics

 

[MarkWinston]

You don't need an expensive amp for the ls50s. A $500 hypex is plenty of power for them, and has no problems with impedance.

I would avoid the wireless version... KEF doesn't have a great track record with their electronics

That active crossover and dsp are really attractive. Ive seen too many mismatched LS50s and Metas, making them sound 'worse' than their active counterparts.

Whats wrong with KEF and their electronics? Many Wireless and Wireless 2 broke down before?

 

[Daverz]

Both will require a sub.. and s sub will always add high pass/placement issues. Stretch the budget a bit go for a kh310

Are these much cheaper in Europe? In the US, you'd have to stretch your budget 3X the Kef to afford the KH310 ($2295 each).

 

[muad]

That active crossover and dsp are really attractive. Ive seen too many mismatched LS50s and Metas, making them sound 'worse' than their active counterparts.

Whats wrong with KEF and their electronics? Many Wireless and Wireless 2 broke down before?

Totally agree with you about actives being better. But I think with the meta's we're at the point of being audibly perfect when used with a subwoofer. Which makes the deeper bass of the wireless moot. The actives will likely measure perfectly but I would assume at this level, the passive and actives would be difficult to tell apart. I personally would avoid their wireless models for the failure rate and considerable cost difference.

Where have you come across mismatched meta's?

 

[MarkWinston]

Totally agree with you about actives being better. But I think with the meta's we're at the point of being audibly perfect when used with a subwoofer. Which makes the deeper bass of the wireless moot. The actives will likely measure perfectly but I would assume at this level, the passive and actives would be difficult to tell apart. I personally would avoid their wireless models for the failure rate and considerable cost difference.

Where have you come across mismatched meta's?

Ive seen people matching ls50s and metas with less powerful amps and thru experience, both of these will truly shine with amps that have way more headroom. Yes they can produce sound with any amp but the ability of these speakers are hindered with lower powered amps. In short, these speakers are rather power hungry. My 2 cents.

 

[Ataraxia]

What amps are LS50 Meta owners using?

 

[MarkWinston]

What amps are LS50 Meta owners using?

For example, Cambridge AXR100/85, Audiolab 6000A, Marantz CR612/412, Marantz PM6007, Rega Brio, etc... Like I said, it will play but its quite far off what the Metas can actually do.

Im personally guilty of this too but I cant afford a more powerful amp at this moment. I know what to do next if I wanted to up the game though.

 

[Ataraxia]

For example, Cambridge AXR100/85, Audiolab 6000A, Marantz CR612/412, Marantz PM6007, Rega Brio, etc... Like I said, it will play but its quite far off what the Metas can actually do.

Im personally guilty of this too but I cant afford a more powerful amp at this moment. I know what to do next if I wanted to up the game though.

My amps include a Yamaha A2080 AVR and Emotiva BasX A-100. I'm thinking about classing up my living room amp at some point and want Dirac included. I will probably get LS50 Metas next. My R3's are not working well with my smallish apartment and speaker placement options.

What amp are you thinking?

 

[Ron Texas]

Until someone does a good blind test I will consider this issue open. Even such a test could have problems because what is one EQ'ing the originals to? Here's what I think. The originals and the Meta's are very similar with the main difference being frequency response which is easy to adjust and something which is very noticeable. It stands to reason if the originals are EQ'ed to Meta frequency response in a good room, they should sound indistinguishible.

 

[MarkWinston]

My amps include a Yamaha A2080 AVR and Emotiva BasX A-100. I'm thinking about classing up my living room amp at some point and want Dirac included. I will probably get LS50 Metas next. My R3's are not working well with my smallish apartment and speaker placement options.

What amp are you thinking?

Amps Im looking at now are the Peachtree Nova 500 and especially the Anthem MCA 225 Gen 2 in particular. That should bring the best out of the LS50. Im dying for a Rega Osiris and McIntosh MA8900 but its way way way out of my budget.

 

[NeoZs99]

Are these much cheaper in Europe? In the US, you'd have to stretch your budget 3X the Kef to afford the KH310 ($2295 each).

In Europe, specially UK the kefs are more expensive..go figure out and I guess the Neumanns cheaper