The KEFs are a lot richer sounding. The JBLs sound somewhat thin by comparison, however the KEFs are almost 10 times the price of the JBLs, which sound really good for such a low priced speaker
The LS50’s have a certain richness, but I feel the A130’s bring forth the vocals nicely without dropping too much clarity in the music. I choose A130. Scratch that. The LS50 just sound muted.
Price is the key factor here.. JBL wins straight a way...Though KEF IS MUCH more clear, but JBL is pure and that to with very much low price. I already picked JBL
Ridiculous that at 1/4 the price of the Kef, the JBL is not bad, and you could add a good REL 8" sub for way less $$$ than the 2 Kefs, and may have a better overall sound. Excluding imaging factors ... Another informative video, thanks.
Harman flipped polarity on the A130 Stage mid production to manipulate its cost to performance relationship. Ask me how I know. Amir and Erin measured the same loudspeaker with an alignment disparity. A130 sonics are polarity dependent. It is one of the greatest bookshelf speakers ever made when it is aligned correctly. Give it a try, positive cable to black terminal on both speakers. They will stun you if you've been listening to them wrong.
Boa tarde!! Acabei de fazer a inversão, não senti muita diferença, abri o volume acima de 80 parece que ficou mais audível vou continuar fazendo teste.
Espero que você esteja feliz com seu JBL A130 de qualquer maneira... você já experimentou um pequeno subwoofer com eles (não apenas para sacudir as paredes, mas para fornecer alcance completo)? Você também pode recomendar alguns álbuns para exibi-los?
Nice comparison. I have JBL a130's and also Kef LS50's. When both are equalized, I'm happier with the JBL's. They have lower distortion in the bass and just more "real" sounding to me. I used equalization worked out on The Audio Science forum. They are both very good. The JBL is easier to equalize because it only has a little bump in the mids vs several problems in the original Kef LS50. I'll probably always keep both for references.
2 years ago I was tripping over my tongue to get a pair of the legendary Kef LS 50's ....... Not so much anymore. They are obviously good but too many cheaper alternatives get to close to justify the price of the Kef. I think the Kef LS 50 is a 600 dollar speaker all day long. The lS 50 is beautiful to look at though.
Not really but alr. They sound like one full range driver, while the vocal and the overall clarity is better on the jbl. And its not even jbl's expensive series, its a budget pair of ones😂 They have the JBL HDI 1600.
The KEF not only looks like it's only got one unit, it sounds like it too. And that's ment in a positive way, it's got the same soundprofile at all frequencies. JBL sounds to me like a kind of drivermismatch, maybe phasedistortion? Used my Sennheiser headphones+NAD D3045 for the comparison.
Thanks for putting these comparisons together. Very helpful as comparing speakers in person is not as easy as they once were. I use a similar amplifier the CXA-60 which also makes the comparison even better.
I wish they'd do a meta classic. The LS50 voice matched perfectly and with so much care to both revive the LS3 5a capturing the voicing spot on with extended highs lows and punch. The Metas sound like what they are, they stopped producing the OG LS50 drivers and reused the cabinet and applied the 12th gen Uni q which is good and all but sounds nothing like the LS3 5as. Perhaps that's why they started just calling them the Metas since the eponymous LS was no longer relevant. They certainly wouldn't stop making the most popular cabinet they ever made with its iconic design although they did down grade the port and the treble extension is no longer there falling off at around 18khz before suddenly rising back up again breaking the continuity the original LS50s had in the high end. The LS50s and the Metas may look the same but are in fact completely different speakers from the core. The mat tech was added to conceal the added gasket seal which did make them sound smoother but the gasket seal was already applied to the blade, the 300X/SEs, and the Active variant the LSxs which also drop like a brick at around 22khz which is fine but the 3001SEs play clear up to 65khz being based on the original hyper tweeter hybrid used on the XQ## series with the flattened tweeter and more pronounced horn. Due to the rapid iterative upgrades that the 300X/SEs needed to prototype the new kef uni q there's a huge hardware lottery. They were also sold as the Pico Forte 3s while the Pico Forte 1s were made from the 1001s first gen. The 1001 first gens were superior to the 1001.2s with a dual magnet design and a clearly much higher quality driver. The completely sealed scaled down Uni Q was needed to create a sealed vessel with a baffle that doubled as a waveguide hidden behind the grill to allow such a small Uni Q sealed speaker to play so loud and clear yet sound as large as the baffle is tall while inducing no rear wave ring distortion at all, while the 300X/SEs were the Pico Forte 3s (Latin for small blades) and were a practice in perfecting the phantom center voicing to nail the sound of the LS3 5as before they would apply the same thing to the LS50s same sized massively over sized voice coil of 2 inches for what would appear to be a "satellite" (the 2001.1/2/3s were always styled after the classic Uni Q, it's design was a hand me down from the celestion AVPs including the binding posts feet and even the stands and the material) the 200X series continue on as the EGG series to Thai day down graded to plastic and still have the distinctly satellite tuning of 2.7khz, 72hz front port (now upside down) and a one inch voice coil. The 3001SEs however ended up with a 2 inch voice coil, 2.2khz crossover and 54hz port tuning which was ported over to the LS50s 1 to 1 except given a bigger box allowing them to have more internal volume for deeper lows and a more classical "hi fi" look and thus price tag. The 3001SEs still sound much better and have the same planar magnetic like tweeter sound that's missing from the LS50s due to the use of a smaller tweeter ellipse (it's deceptive, inspect the tweeter, the tweeter on the LS50 is as if sliced from a ping pong ball while the tweeter to the 3001SEs were sliced from a billiard ball. Both are stiffened by the dual diaphragm while the 3001SEs have the sealed gasket making the front entirely air tight so even at max volume they remain just as smooth and never distort unlike the EGG series or become shouty like the LS50s and all other kef speakers besides their flag ship, and also the LSx which is effectively active 3001SEs distinct due to it being the only other kef driver to feature the sealed suspension gasket to render the uni q entirely air tight. The Metas are 12 gen and rather than calling the sealed suspension tech what it is is now called the gasket dampener or something else vague enough the gains from what was already invented and could have been implemented wasn't until now. So the Metas have may tech and the smoothness that sealing the Uni Q which they could have done all along, and also gave the LSx the same smoothness could be attributed instead to the Meta MAT tech. Marketing and r and d can be friends after all. The LS60s are the LSx and 2 of the KC62 subs assembled like the Blade nanos. Pro tip, get a pair of the T2s, better yet the HTB2Ws. They're the same exact thing, same driver same Amp, but the HTB2Ws are a much more refined design and more versatile. They mate perfectly with both the LS series and the 3001SEs since that is what they were designed for. They play up to 350hz clear as a bell and are timbre matched to fill in for where the LS series and the 3001SEs would need to be augmented and will sound exactly as good as the LS60s for a fraction of the price. Just make sure to dual Amp them so that each sub is treated as if it were the LF section to the accompanying main. That'd why they're capable of playing up to 350hz with a curve that blends seamlessly with all of the above mains. th-cam.com/video/R9HqKd5Y7Q4/w-d-xo.html The 1001 (not to be mistaken for the single magnet 1001.2s) are also fantastic for what they are. th-cam.com/video/pVH-vH4i9ks/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/blMx_ONiwg4/w-d-xo.html
Not sure what's bogus here....the JBL surely reach the experience from KEF at much lower price point allowing you to spend on amps and dac. They surely are a great VFM
![Sony SSCS5 vs JBL Stage A130 Sound Comparison [Blind Test] With Marantz PM7000N](/img/n.gif)
Got them both. Liked the JBLs better. The Meta sounded dull and predictable while the JBLs sparkle.
The kef is natural sounding. The JBL is enjoyable to listen. I pick JBL.
심지어 가격도 5배 더 저렴함 ㅎ
@@블루스맨-s2w I don't understand. Thanks anyway.
@@rodplanet5901the jbl's are 5 times cheaper
Please see the message I just posted. Happy listening!!!
The KEFs are a lot richer sounding. The JBLs sound somewhat thin by comparison, however the KEFs are almost 10 times the price of the JBLs, which sound really good for such a low priced speaker
The LS50’s have a certain richness, but I feel the A130’s bring forth the vocals nicely without dropping too much clarity in the music. I choose A130.
Scratch that. The LS50 just sound muted.
Price is the key factor here..
JBL wins straight a way...Though KEF IS MUCH more clear, but JBL is pure and that to with very much low price. I already picked JBL
Ridiculous that at 1/4 the price of the Kef, the JBL is not bad, and you could add a good REL 8" sub for way less $$$ than the 2 Kefs, and may have a better overall sound. Excluding imaging factors ... Another informative video, thanks.
'Better than life' is a good track to tell the difference between speakers.
Harman flipped polarity on the A130 Stage mid production to manipulate its cost to performance relationship. Ask me how I know. Amir and Erin measured the same loudspeaker with an alignment disparity. A130 sonics are polarity dependent. It is one of the greatest bookshelf speakers ever made when it is aligned correctly. Give it a try, positive cable to black terminal on both speakers. They will stun you if you've been listening to them wrong.
Amigo explique melhor essa ligação por favor estou muito insatisfeito com minhas JBL A130
@@aureliocaetanodasilva1192teste trocando a polaridade. Fio preto no borne vermelho e vice versa. Se fizer volte para falar como ficou. Por favor.
Boa tarde!! Acabei de fazer a inversão, não senti muita diferença, abri o volume acima de 80 parece que ficou mais audível vou continuar fazendo teste.
Espero que você esteja feliz com seu JBL A130 de qualquer maneira... você já experimentou um pequeno subwoofer com eles (não apenas para sacudir as paredes, mas para fornecer alcance completo)? Você também pode recomendar alguns álbuns para exibi-los?
@@eriktomas9194REL 8" sub would be great with the JBL's.
Nice comparison. I have JBL a130's and also Kef LS50's. When both are equalized, I'm happier with the JBL's. They have lower distortion in the bass and just more "real" sounding to me. I used equalization worked out on The Audio Science forum. They are both very good. The JBL is easier to equalize because it only has a little bump in the mids vs several problems in the original Kef LS50. I'll probably always keep both for references.
Please see the message I just posted. Happy listening!!!
JBL+Add 2 Subwoofers 10 inch+Add good source.....Good comparison
Kef seems better with the treble and less "echoing" overall...
2 years ago I was tripping over my tongue to get a pair of the legendary Kef LS 50's ....... Not so much anymore. They are obviously good but too many cheaper alternatives get to close to justify the price of the Kef. I think the Kef LS 50 is a 600 dollar speaker all day long. The lS 50 is beautiful to look at though.
Not buying KEF Meta at any price... AJ designs, now that's another story. Almost another Planet....
The BEST,JBL for me.
Wow, what a difference. The A130s are good but when you put side by side... The KEFs are great. In this case you get what you pay for.
Not really but alr. They sound like one full range driver, while the vocal and the overall clarity is better on the jbl.
And its not even jbl's expensive series, its a budget pair of ones😂
They have the JBL HDI 1600.
Stage series are cutting edge design. Please see the message I just posted about A130 and possibly others in the stage line.
The KEF not only looks like it's only got one unit, it sounds like it too. And that's ment in a positive way, it's got the same soundprofile at all frequencies. JBL sounds to me like a kind of drivermismatch, maybe phasedistortion?
Used my Sennheiser headphones+NAD D3045 for the comparison.
Thanks for putting these comparisons together. Very helpful as comparing speakers in person is not as easy as they once were. I use a similar amplifier the CXA-60 which also makes the comparison even better.
I actually like the JBLs a bit better. And at 1/10 the prices you can't lose. I think the KEF Q300s actually sound better than the LS50.
Several reviewers liked the Q300s better than the original LS50 speakers.
KEF LS50 Meta 聲音像是在小房間，JBL Stage A130則像是在禮堂，寬鬆自然，不看價格，我還是會選擇A130。
Am I the only one that hears KEFs being too hollow and boxy? The JBLs sound fuller and more cohesive to me
KEF = Keep 'em Fooled... No Metas for me ever.
Kef gives more smooth in vocals jbls stands overall frequency balance both are good but kef beats
Unsurprisingly the KEF sounds way better
Please bring back "Better Than Life" track to new comparison videos. 2 must have track "Better Than Life" & "Time Travelling"
Clearly JBL with 1/5 of KEF price. KEF sounds manufactured in Tajikistan
Jbl wimner those kef meta lock in the mids clearly
I wish they'd do a meta classic. The LS50 voice matched perfectly and with so much care to both revive the LS3 5a capturing the voicing spot on with extended highs lows and punch. The Metas sound like what they are, they stopped producing the OG LS50 drivers and reused the cabinet and applied the 12th gen Uni q which is good and all but sounds nothing like the LS3 5as. Perhaps that's why they started just calling them the Metas since the eponymous LS was no longer relevant. They certainly wouldn't stop making the most popular cabinet they ever made with its iconic design although they did down grade the port and the treble extension is no longer there falling off at around 18khz before suddenly rising back up again breaking the continuity the original LS50s had in the high end.
The LS50s and the Metas may look the same but are in fact completely different speakers from the core.
The mat tech was added to conceal the added gasket seal which did make them sound smoother but the gasket seal was already applied to the blade, the 300X/SEs, and the Active variant the LSxs which also drop like a brick at around 22khz which is fine but the 3001SEs play clear up to 65khz being based on the original hyper tweeter hybrid used on the XQ## series with the flattened tweeter and more pronounced horn.
Due to the rapid iterative upgrades that the 300X/SEs needed to prototype the new kef uni q there's a huge hardware lottery. They were also sold as the Pico Forte 3s while the Pico Forte 1s were made from the 1001s first gen. The 1001 first gens were superior to the 1001.2s with a dual magnet design and a clearly much higher quality driver. The completely sealed scaled down Uni Q was needed to create a sealed vessel with a baffle that doubled as a waveguide hidden behind the grill to allow such a small Uni Q sealed speaker to play so loud and clear yet sound as large as the baffle is tall while inducing no rear wave ring distortion at all, while the 300X/SEs were the Pico Forte 3s (Latin for small blades) and were a practice in perfecting the phantom center voicing to nail the sound of the LS3 5as before they would apply the same thing to the LS50s same sized massively over sized voice coil of 2 inches for what would appear to be a "satellite" (the 2001.1/2/3s were always styled after the classic Uni Q, it's design was a hand me down from the celestion AVPs including the binding posts feet and even the stands and the material) the 200X series continue on as the EGG series to Thai day down graded to plastic and still have the distinctly satellite tuning of 2.7khz, 72hz front port (now upside down) and a one inch voice coil. The 3001SEs however ended up with a 2 inch voice coil, 2.2khz crossover and 54hz port tuning which was ported over to the LS50s 1 to 1 except given a bigger box allowing them to have more internal volume for deeper lows and a more classical "hi fi" look and thus price tag. The 3001SEs still sound much better and have the same planar magnetic like tweeter sound that's missing from the LS50s due to the use of a smaller tweeter ellipse (it's deceptive, inspect the tweeter, the tweeter on the LS50 is as if sliced from a ping pong ball while the tweeter to the 3001SEs were sliced from a billiard ball. Both are stiffened by the dual diaphragm while the 3001SEs have the sealed gasket making the front entirely air tight so even at max volume they remain just as smooth and never distort unlike the EGG series or become shouty like the LS50s and all other kef speakers besides their flag ship, and also the LSx which is effectively active 3001SEs distinct due to it being the only other kef driver to feature the sealed suspension gasket to render the uni q entirely air tight.
The Metas are 12 gen and rather than calling the sealed suspension tech what it is is now called the gasket dampener or something else vague enough the gains from what was already invented and could have been implemented wasn't until now. So the Metas have may tech and the smoothness that sealing the Uni Q which they could have done all along, and also gave the LSx the same smoothness could be attributed instead to the Meta MAT tech.
Marketing and r and d can be friends after all. The LS60s are the LSx and 2 of the KC62 subs assembled like the Blade nanos.
Pro tip, get a pair of the T2s, better yet the HTB2Ws. They're the same exact thing, same driver same Amp, but the HTB2Ws are a much more refined design and more versatile. They mate perfectly with both the LS series and the 3001SEs since that is what they were designed for. They play up to 350hz clear as a bell and are timbre matched to fill in for where the LS series and the 3001SEs would need to be augmented and will sound exactly as good as the LS60s for a fraction of the price. Just make sure to dual Amp them so that each sub is treated as if it were the LF section to the accompanying main. That'd why they're capable of playing up to 350hz with a curve that blends seamlessly with all of the above mains.
th-cam.com/video/R9HqKd5Y7Q4/w-d-xo.html
The 1001 (not to be mistaken for the single magnet 1001.2s) are also fantastic for what they are.
th-cam.com/video/pVH-vH4i9ks/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/blMx_ONiwg4/w-d-xo.html
JBL win.
Definitely JBL A130 with EQ (drop mid in 1.3Khz region) and save other money for AMP and DAC
A130 don't require EQ. Please see the message I posted about them.
Maybe Sub too! Heck, get a used car too ha.
Both coloured sound. (at least in the video)
Les Kef sonnent un peu mieux dans le haut du spectre mais à quel prix 😮
In front of kef LS50 jbl sounds so thin but in terms of pricing JBL wins easily.
You've never heard A130 correctly. See the message I just posted. They are an engineering marvel.
2 ways speakers are always better then 1 way.
KEFs sound flat to me compared to JBL, which sounds wide and spread out.
By comparison Ls50 sounds like manufactured in tajikistan. Doesnt deserve the money spent
Jbl has a deeper inside , Kef push ahead .
To me the jbl sounded artificial and harsh while the kef was sweet and true.
KEF tem um som mais bonito, JBL tem médio de corneta
Bad stereo image with the Kef. Jbl is much better.
A130 sound sounds better. .for me
$300.00 vs $1300.00
Kef sounds real jbl sounds colored
I just posted a message to all regarding the Stage series. They are brilliant when alignment is restored.
jbl.
klipsch e JBL sono miti come dice Califano il resto è noia
The KEF LS50 Meta cost $1500 USD vs the JBL's at $200. Bogus comparison.
Not sure what's bogus here....the JBL surely reach the experience from KEF at much lower price point allowing you to spend on amps and dac. They surely are a great VFM
Off course add a subwoofer to the A130 and it beats most speakers out of the park.
@@graceMASTER777 Comparisons are performed by equivalent costs. It's like comparing a Ferrari to a Corvette.
@@rancosteelAnd who wants maintenance costs of a Ferrari? Fair means not getting ripped off.