|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.66.15.180
I recently picked up a set each (open box, so I wouldn't lose much, if anything, upon resale) of B&W 685 S2, Kef Q300 & Kef Q100 (an afterthought tentative purchase) speakers with the intention of giving each a real world (for me) workout in their possible future environment (so difficult, if not impossible, to find out what you need to know about speakers outside of their intended element, IMHO). Beforehand, according to most of the reviews/crosstalk, I thought I would have preferred the B&Ws, followed closely by the Q300s & trailed by the noticibly weaker Q100s. Well, to my surprise, after a thorough multi day intensive tryout of each on stands in my bass-trap/acoustic paneled small bedroom, it turned out to be the other way around! Thank goodness for afterthought tentative purchases!
Edits: 01/25/16Follow Ups:
Could you please elaborate on your listening experience wrt each speaker? That would be very interesting to fellow inmates.
Cheers
Bill
The B&Ws are voiced too high for my tastes..... the cymbals, in particular, especially in ride/splash mode are cringingly harsh, effectively eliminating most Jazz & Rock (I listen to approximately 60% Classical, 20% Jazz, & 19% Rock/Folk..... the remaining 1% you don't wanna know about!) as a pleasurable listening experience. This high voicing also affects the piano by seemingly eliminating some underlying harmonics (that's just my impression, of course) & having it sound thinnish, less like a full timbered instrument than the Kef's depiction, taking much of the pleasure out of so much Classical music in addition. Don't get me wrong, this high voicing has these speakers sounding wonderful with some other instruments (women's voices in particular), but the negatives are so glaring to me that I couldn't live with them.
The Kef Q300s, in comparison, sound, upon initial listen, disappointingly duller & flatter, but as my ears adjusted, I realized it was only a comparative "negative". The Kefs aren't GREAT with cymbals either (IMO the most difficult instrument to depict properly without adversely affecting too much of the rest of a speaker's soundscape), but much better than than B&Ws, & a piano has the full rich sound of a piano, not the unsatisfying toy-like sound I perceive from the B&Ws. The B&Ws blow you over initially with their bright/right there presence, but upon further listening, pale in comparison to the more natural sound of the Kefs.
After choosing the Q300s over the B&Ws, I gave the smaller Kefs a spin. I had initially decided to include these in my search because, within & about my internet search for info on the B&Ws & Kefs, there would always be a voice or two on many threads stating that the Q100s were actually a better speaker than the much more lauded Q300s. Turns out that was/is the case, at least as far as I'm concerned. Sound almost identical to the 300s, of course, with the following differences:
The smaller woofer on the 100 does a better job with the midrange than the larger 300, not only in the comparison of one to the other, but just as importantly (maybe more so) in relation to the tweeter & the bass it produces. Seems to be a smoother crossover transfer (I seem to hear a bit of confusion in the crossover transfer on pianos in particular when passing through a particular tonal range on the Q300s, for example, & I don't notice that on the 100s), the balance between highs & lows seem more cohesive, even the lows being more satisfying in their balance with the rest of the speaker as opposed to just being slightly deeper on the 300s (I like my bass as well as the next guy, but not overpowering/overemphasized bass, which, while admittedly subjective, seems to fly in the face of the tastes of many others). There are times, of course, when I "could use" a bit more bass, but not to the detriment of the rest of the range. Anyways, I more often than not find those times are due to poor recording of the bass (of which there is far too much of), not a lacking of the speakers abilities.
Speakers at this price range (& all price ranges to some degree, for that matter) are not perfect by many means, to be sure, but amongst these three, the positive/negative balance I can most easily live with is represented by the Q100s.
By the way, these dwell in a small room in an apartment building, consequently my testing/listening levels are of the lowish to moderate variety.
Oh, & these were run off of a Marantz PM6005 Amp.
Edits: 01/26/16 01/26/16 01/26/16 01/26/16 01/26/16 01/26/16
I must thank you for that post which is very enlightening. Some of your reactions are exactly like mine, like not liking bass interfering with the mid et al. There is a KEF place nearby, must audition that 100.
Cheers
Bill
B&W speakers have always sounded sterile to me.
What size woofer does the Q100's have? I have just recently been looking at those very same speakers. I live in a small town with no dealers and have to purchase online. Can you tell me what equipment you were using with them and the sound characteristics of ea. speaker? This info would be much appreciated...
Ears are funny. I always tell people that we all hear differently so listen listen listen whether you are buying speakers or guitars!
I also find sometimes you get what you pay for so it's a real balancing act.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: