@@Tharbamar How come you find the Evo's sweetspot large when all reviewers and the graphs tell the opposite story, that they beam aggressively above 6kHz? People complain that the sound changes dramatically even when they move their hand a few inches to pick something from the table
Ask expected, kef will delivery more detail and crispy sound. While evo 4.2 will have that musical projection. I prefer the evo sound signature but i do get why people like the ls50. I just like speakers that i can listen for long periods of time. From the demo, the ls50 will impress almost everyone but will be too fatiguing for me.
Thanks you very much for this great and usual Honest review. I follow and watch your video since a while and each time I really enjoy your approach, clear explanation of how speaker sound and above all your true honesty. Since month I am hesitating by picking up evo 4.2 and recently LS50 old model (since there are actually in discount at 600e) I just ordered evo 4.2 based on this last video because I see more of my taste will be filled by Evo. Thanks a lot for your great review and help ! Cedric
I think the fact that a £1000 pair of loudspeakers (KEF) are being compared to a £600 pair of loudspeakers ( Wharfedales) says much more about the Wharfedales than it does about the Kefs. The sonic superiority of the Wharfedales is evident here, but to compound the value on offer just look at them, they are incredible looking, real head turners. Wharfedale are one of several UK loudspeaker companies that have a reputation of offering extremely good products at very competitive prices.
I in general agree with you, but we will need better information about the drivers, and finally, it comes to taste. Also KEF often are very good at low volume.
The Meta is impressive, but I'll take the Evo. Better balance, less fatiguing for extended listening periods. Can handle louder volumes better as well (as Tharbamar stated).
Great review, you commented on both of then in a down to earth way. I'll take the Evo's. KEF does exactly what most speaker manufacturers do these days, they throw a massive amount of detail at you forgetting what speakers should be designed for, that is enjoyment of music. The KEF's might sound better and less boxy in this comparison, that's only because of their sharpness. I used to pick my speakers based on this characteristic but what I found out is that after a week or two of listening to them that amazing detail becomes very fatiguing, taking away the joy and subtlety in music. And from this point on I'm rarely motivated to listen to music anymore, which defeats the whole purpose.
this is hard to even understand. have you ever heard an orchestra, opera live? it is the height of detail and is no way fatiguing. why would i want a speaker to diminish the music that's being played on the other end? it's like saying you'd prefer a blurry video so to leave more to the imagination, as if observing the world with your own eyeballs are fatiguing. do you play an instrument by chance? the difference here sounds like, for example, a cheap guitar vs. a quality handmade guitar. truth is, Evo just is not a speaker quality enough to reproduce the sounds of live music.
Great video, as someone that owns a pair of bright speakers, the Evo 4.2 will be perfect to use for when I am feeling fatigued. Thank you for this video.
The vocals on the KEF could have cut glass it was so sharp. I have soon in the game with a pair of EVO 4.2 but I out my money where my mouth is, no regrets especially as I picked them up as ex demo for £350.
Such a thorough and well put together video (descriptors and links), much appreciated. Also, I auditioned the Wharfedale Evos in person, and there was something special about them to me. For the price differential, I would definitely go with the Evo 4.2. Your space is sparingly beautiful. I was wondering how does one go about determining whether to use sound panels or not and Where to place them?
@@next3576 my father used to own the ls50 and grew sick of them. The reason is very simple. Driver diversity results in lower distortion. I'm surprised at the compression I can hear on the bottom end.
The 2nd track Scarborough Fair by Yao Is Ting clearly showed the difference in high frequencies. The Kef Meta is too bright and crisp that makes a fatiguing effect for long listening session. Evo 4.2 managed to present the female voice in a soft and easy to hear sound. Higher resolution and detailing of Kef has its own cons. The found that the bass in first track is better in Kef Meta because it is more controlled and tighter. Kef has done a brilliant job to deliver lows with such a small cabin. The Evo sounded a little boxy sound, it maybe because I am listening it on TH-cam with Audio Technica headphones but Kef sounded better in lows. I think Evo is a better choice as it is a comparable speaker with meta in all aspects even with different prices. Both have their Ups and downs.
I do not agree. The Kef’s are not fatiguing on the long term at all. But they bring emotion of the singer into the room. That’s what I miss with the Evo’s, they sound good, but they lack the emotion I am looking for in music. For example, listen to the attack of the drum stick on the edge of the snare drum in sample 2. The LS50 has speed and depth in the sound, things I miss at the Evo.
except point source thing . Make no mistake on low volume KEF will have razor sharp image , easy to listen and falow . But as SPL goes up problems will start mounting and EVO4.2 will take the top place . But it will not get that razor sharp image due to not being a point source . There is no win win in audio , its a compromise . So best is to have them both
Only a question: why the manufacturers give wrong datas/parameters at new loudspeakers? The evo 4.2 has 150 mm bass driver, not 6,5".The diamond 10.2 has 6,5",yes +just a little bit bigger...🤔 The good old loudspeakers if you read that in catalog at speaker size 8" there was a real 200mm speaker. Why need to cosmetic these datas? The size is an important thing at woofers/midbass drivers because of the moving air mass. I know today manufacturing long throw bass units etc with little size but never will be good as a simple old real 8" or 10" bass driver.
@@AbsoluteFidelity This thing reminds me the cheap speakers where the "size"(diameter) grooved by the edge of the basket/chassis. I think the real diameter is based on the efficient cone+max the half of the felxible edge diameter.
The problem with audio reviews is that speakers and their sound are described with words. Without live listening it's only a road sign a hint. And after all that it goes to the most important thing that anyone can hear far more than difference between lets say those two speakers and it is room acoustics.
@@thruthspeaker2476 agreed, even good reviews with measurements and comparisons are not perfect methods to decide what to buy, but this review is useful enough that at least the reviewer deserves kudos
Hi! I am big wharfedale fan, but now I think the Ls50 is better. The ls50 is liquid, the sound is one unit-at the wharfedale I heard a little hole (maybe cause of cross frequencies at 3 way). The bass is massive and strong at wharfedale but little muddy-this effect makes heavy and unclear the both soundstage. The ls50 is "easy", has good bass but has also living mids and highs. The bass not massing the sound. Good job-good test! Best regards!
In this test, the Evo 4.2 clinch it for me. The LS50 just cannot compete with the same drama that the Evo's bring. But that is no big surprise, since the Evo's are a bigger box, with three seperate drivers. They sounded bigger, fuller, and just more accomplished than the LS50's. That said, in another test against a pair of Monitor Audio Bronze 2's, the LS50's sounded much more open and forward than the Bronze 2's, especially with vocals and strings. So a more pronounced mid range too, than the Bronze 2's. So all this goes to prove, that you really must listen, and make your own comparisons, before settling on a pair of speakers, because you MAY overlook the ones that got away, the one's that will blow you away when you hear them.
Kef looks livelier, but it is not, Wharfedale Evo 4.2 is firmlier - listen to drums on first, violin on second and guitar on third song - no halo, no glear on Evo. Opinion based on listening to this clip
its the bass. it goes deep and wide. its not earth shaking or screaming for attention. but its everywhere. a lot may like it. some may won't. it does make the music sound fuller and more spread out the room.
How do you know it's not the room modes? The Evo go lower in frequency and so they can excite room modes that the Kef can't, and room modes reverberate.
7:32 vs 10:04 is a great comparison. Evo wins for mine. Thanks for the sample. Plenty of reviews with opinions but with good headphones i can hear the difference here. Although i thinkn the KEF's are great the added bass and fullness of the Evo's put it ahead.
Perhaps you can get a sense of it through your headphones any way, but I wonder whether the imaging ability from KEF’s coaxial driver would outweigh the Wharfedale’s dominance with the low end frequencies.
Hello @Tharbamar! I really appreciate your content. I have a question. I really did appreciate the evos combined with my denon pma2010AE. I just wanted to go up a knotch in the quality of my sound and some people recomended me to get better speakers. So I sold the evos and i still have the same amp. What speakers do you think would bring more value to this amp, above the evos, in the 2k price range? I will mention that I paid around 500$ for the evos in my country. So they aren't as expensive as in the US. Also, I am listening to all kinds of music. I am the kind of person who appreciates the feeling that a song gives you, so I don't have a fav genere, to say so. Thank you and I wish you the best!
If you could, being that both are great speakers, would you keep both speakers in your listening room without having to choose the best of both? One week or month, eg. you would hear the EVOs and then the next week or month the LS50 Metas? Is it a wise choice or a senseless one?
I understand your thoughts, which I do as well but I would suggest you to try just KEF R3 for the better sound, frequency response and power handling, thanks
I have the regular wired LS50. Some songs sound amazing. Some songs sound thin and weak. I never know which until I play a song. I do have a B&W AS300 sub. Another great review.
Same for me, although for £540 they're a phenomenal speaker and much better (to my ear anyway) then the similarly priced Tannoy floor standers that I previously had. Apparently the Meta's are even better.
Can you do a comparison between kef r3 and Evo 4.2? I know the let R3 is twice the price but it would be really interesting. As usual the review was very well structured and detailed.
Here is a good Reviewer . Showing you Frequency response as well as Dynamics , no bulshit this bulshit that play it And what i take from it is the Image Precision of LS50 , GOD DAMN you just cant beat the coaxial driver . I can hear it over you tube . Also my table is shaking more with LS 50 , whats that around 50hz , and look at the graph , there it is , boost at lowest range . So the Graph is trust worthy , and im sure Phase Graph would show how it is Superior However , i still like 3 way for its dynamics and loudness . Cant decide .
They both sound nice and open but the wharfedale has better/more accurate midbass and deeper bass. The best version of the KEF though is the Active Wireless version.
I can assure you that the Kef’s are not bright at all. I’ve heard lots of very expensive hi end loudspeakers, and they all are as bright or mostly brighter sounding than the Meta’s. And… the Meta’s are very different than the old LS50’s. The original LS50’s are too bright sounding in some songs, not all.
Tharbamar, great review as always! Based on your review I bought Evo4.2 and couldn’t be happier! Very well made and sound is great! One thing is bothering me: Regarding the phase plug on the woofer, you said (and show) that it is real phase plug, but on my Evo phase plug is moving with cone!? Can you please investigate, did wharfedale change woofer in recent production of Evo4.2?
KEF LS50 is very nice but kinda high in base and sibilance. At first KEF wins but in long listening...I can last better with Wharfedale Evo. Balance...sweet sound, no extra just good sounding, good musicality overall. IMHO.
I have a quick compare Evo 4.2 with Kanto Tuk in a same setting. Evo 4.2 has a balance sound, but mid-bass have a bit tail & hum. Totally Kanto Tuk in a smaller shape but it has a amazing sound. Fantastic Bass, and dynamic.
thank you for your review. I really have a little fever for that evo 4.2. I have Wharfedale Denton 80th Anniversary and I have been liking them but that Evo is in my mind still.. :)
Just heard the ATC SCM19 v2 bookshelf speakers. Would love to hear your thoughts on those and an audio comparison/sound demo, if you can get your hands them.
Funny you say that... I heard the 50 Metas with the Rotel 1572 and loved it... but wasn't able to test the 4.2's on the same amp, which was very frustrating lol. Glad to hear you enjoy the combination, as this is what I'm thinking of getting :)
Quality wise. I have read multiple reviews, and the people, have mentioned, THE EVO gets a bit cranky, and tone of of the speaker changes over time. What would be your concerns,? I am moving from a B%W 685 set to these. Am I gaining, or losing anything in the process? Thanks for your advice, in advance. > Mark
Kef are absolutly unforgiving, with an oustanding midrange, the treble are well centered and expressive but unfortunelly lacks in bass, is too "flat" imho, at the other hand the evos lacks in midrange, bur both treble and bass are outstanding for the size, and very good for the price.
The KEFs sound a bit more forwarding, warmer and more pricise in midrange. I like the sound of the KEFs a little better but i would never pay 500$ more. They are way too overpriced. Normal LS50s are on sale for about 600€ all the time here in Germany. 1500$ for the Meta is not a fair deal
I bought the old Evo II about 3 or 4 years ago, I got swindled 700 USD for the pair due to lack of research (the new Evo 4 was already out) but I picked it over the new Diamond 10. Anyway I picked it for the warmth smoothness and soundstage, the speaker was not exciting and the imaging was ok but the it makes every bad recording sound good.
Kef have done a great work whit just one cone speaker.... But the wharfdale have a better more open sound.. Its not fair to judge a 3.way against a 1.way speaker... If want a smal cheaper then is the kef what you go after.. Thanks for the session 👍🙏
The quality and format of your videos are amazing. You’ve obviously put a lot of effort and thought into the presentation. I truly appreciate it.
Thank you.
@@Tharbamar Hello sir, we have the Evo 4.2. suggest us an upgrade around 1500usd of speakers over this please. Thanks
@@Tharbamar How come you find the Evo's sweetspot large when all reviewers and the graphs tell the opposite story, that they beam aggressively above 6kHz? People complain that the sound changes dramatically even when they move their hand a few inches to pick something from the table
Ask expected, kef will delivery more detail and crispy sound. While evo 4.2 will have that musical projection. I prefer the evo sound signature but i do get why people like the ls50.
I just like speakers that i can listen for long periods of time. From the demo, the ls50 will impress almost everyone but will be too fatiguing for me.
The ls50 s are nice to listen to for short periods of time but like yourself I like to listen to my music for hours on end!
Totally shocked by the Evo 4.2, way better then LS50 Meta to my ears!
KEF wins by miles. It's not even close
This video better demonstrates that the kefs can do bass
I like Wharfedale Evo 4.2 for my taste. Very natural and well blended.
Bless for your personal apporach and not trying to theorize for the listener. I value the journey and can theorize for myself.
Thanks you very much for this great and usual Honest review. I follow and watch your video since a while and each time I really enjoy your approach, clear explanation of how speaker sound and above all your true honesty.
Since month I am hesitating by picking up evo 4.2 and recently LS50 old model (since there are actually in discount at 600e)
I just ordered evo 4.2 based on this last video because I see more of my taste will be filled by Evo.
Thanks a lot for your great review and help !
Cedric
The BEST, Evo 4.2. for me.
I think the fact that a £1000 pair of loudspeakers (KEF) are being compared to a £600 pair of loudspeakers ( Wharfedales) says much more about the Wharfedales than it does about the Kefs. The sonic superiority of the Wharfedales is evident here, but to compound the value on offer just look at them, they are incredible looking, real head turners. Wharfedale are one of several UK loudspeaker companies that have a reputation of offering extremely good products at very competitive prices.
I in general agree with you, but we will need better information about the drivers, and finally, it comes to taste. Also KEF often are very good at low volume.
The Meta is impressive, but I'll take the Evo. Better balance, less fatiguing for extended listening periods. Can handle louder volumes better as well (as Tharbamar stated).
I on the other hand like the Metas more, and like what they sound very well at. low volume.
Great review, you commented on both of then in a down to earth way. I'll take the Evo's. KEF does exactly what most speaker manufacturers do these days, they throw a massive amount of detail at you forgetting what speakers should be designed for, that is enjoyment of music.
The KEF's might sound better and less boxy in this comparison, that's only because of their sharpness. I used to pick my speakers based on this characteristic but what I found out is that after a week or two of listening to them that amazing detail becomes very fatiguing, taking away the joy and
subtlety in music.
And from this point on I'm rarely motivated to listen to music anymore, which defeats the whole purpose.
Very well put
Exactly what i felt with my ex pair of Kef R3. Very detailed but hard to listen for long periods of time.
Add sub for fucks sake. I mean only idiots can enjoy bookshelfs whitout sub.
this is hard to even understand. have you ever heard an orchestra, opera live? it is the height of detail and is no way fatiguing. why would i want a speaker to diminish the music that's being played on the other end? it's like saying you'd prefer a blurry video so to leave more to the imagination, as if observing the world with your own eyeballs are fatiguing.
do you play an instrument by chance? the difference here sounds like, for example, a cheap guitar vs. a quality handmade guitar.
truth is, Evo just is not a speaker quality enough to reproduce the sounds of live music.
evo sounds like it's in the bottom of a cave ...
I'd pick the LS50! Amazing and complete review. Thanks!
Great video, as someone that owns a pair of bright speakers, the Evo 4.2 will be perfect to use for when I am feeling fatigued. Thank you for this video.
The vocals on the KEF could have cut glass it was so sharp. I have soon in the game with a pair of EVO 4.2 but I out my money where my mouth is, no regrets especially as I picked them up as ex demo for £350.
Such a thorough and well put together video (descriptors and links), much appreciated. Also, I auditioned the Wharfedale Evos in person, and there was something special about them to me. For the price differential, I would definitely go with the Evo 4.2. Your space is sparingly beautiful. I was wondering how does one go about determining whether to use sound panels or not and Where to place them?
The wharfdales sound better thank you for this demo
You are deaf.
@@next3576 thank you I thought something was wrong with my ears
Wharfedales rule....
@@next3576 my father used to own the ls50 and grew sick of them. The reason is very simple. Driver diversity results in lower distortion. I'm surprised at the compression I can hear on the bottom end.
@@next3576 and you are just an ignorant fanboy. Keep fanning.
Wharfedale EVO 4.2 the music embraces you.
KEF LS 50 Meta the music confronts you.
The 2nd track Scarborough Fair by Yao Is Ting clearly showed the difference in high frequencies. The Kef Meta is too bright and crisp that makes a fatiguing effect for long listening session. Evo 4.2 managed to present the female voice in a soft and easy to hear sound. Higher resolution and detailing of Kef has its own cons.
The found that the bass in first track is better in Kef Meta because it is more controlled and tighter. Kef has done a brilliant job to deliver lows with such a small cabin. The Evo sounded a little boxy sound, it maybe because I am listening it on TH-cam with Audio Technica headphones but Kef sounded better in lows.
I think Evo is a better choice as it is a comparable speaker with meta in all aspects even with different prices. Both have their Ups and downs.
I do not agree. The Kef’s are not fatiguing on the long term at all. But they bring emotion of the singer into the room. That’s what I miss with the Evo’s, they sound good, but they lack the emotion I am looking for in music. For example, listen to the attack of the drum stick on the edge of the snare drum in sample 2. The LS50 has speed and depth in the sound, things I miss at the Evo.
Which is interesting because the frequency response at 0:19 shows the LS50 is actually lower on the high ends (except at the very end).
@@Freedom89984 Ahahaha these overhyped, by mediocre hearing sensed people, KEFs have flat and emotionless vocal
Much prefer the Evo 4.2. Just a fuller more musical sound. Have the Evo 4.4 which are only £200 more than KEF in UK. Really no competition.
Evo 4.2 has it going on in every way.
Another 👍👍review
except point source thing . Make no mistake on low volume KEF will have razor sharp image , easy to listen and falow .
But as SPL goes up problems will start mounting and EVO4.2 will take the top place .
But it will not get that razor sharp image due to not being a point source .
There is no win win in audio , its a compromise .
So best is to have them both
Only a question: why the manufacturers give wrong datas/parameters at new loudspeakers? The evo 4.2 has 150 mm bass driver, not 6,5".The diamond 10.2 has 6,5",yes +just a little bit bigger...🤔
The good old loudspeakers if you read that in catalog at speaker size 8" there was a real 200mm speaker. Why need to cosmetic these datas?
The size is an important thing at woofers/midbass drivers because of the moving air mass.
I know today manufacturing long throw bass units etc with little size but never will be good as a simple old real 8" or 10" bass driver.
6.5 inches is the size of the basket. Wharfedale and a few other manufacturers measure it that way.
@@AbsoluteFidelity This thing reminds me the cheap speakers where the "size"(diameter) grooved by the edge of the basket/chassis.
I think the real diameter is based on the efficient cone+max the half of the felxible edge diameter.
Hello, where can we find these very pretty acoustic panels ? Please 👋
Very accurate and honest review that is useful for potential buyers. Wish more reviewers did this more consumer-oriented review style.
The problem with audio reviews is that speakers and their sound are described with words. Without live listening it's only a road sign a hint.
And after all that it goes to the most important thing that anyone can hear far more than difference between lets say those two speakers and it is room acoustics.
@@thruthspeaker2476 agreed, even good reviews with measurements and comparisons are not perfect methods to decide what to buy, but this review is useful enough that at least the reviewer deserves kudos
KEF is the best sound for me
Thanks so much for your superb review. LS50 meta would be my choice. Very nice demo too.
Evo4.2 has deeper base due to physical stuff.
Well said
The kef sounds lucious... Appreciate the effort u put in....👍
The 4.2 is one of the best I've heard under $2000
Hello, we have the Evo 4.2/. Would you recommend an upgrade over this ? Around 1500usd please
The audio sample recording are worth a million words. Thank you! 💜
Hi! I am big wharfedale fan, but now I think the Ls50 is better.
The ls50 is liquid, the sound is one unit-at the wharfedale I heard a little hole (maybe cause of cross frequencies at 3 way).
The bass is massive and strong at wharfedale but little muddy-this effect makes heavy and unclear the both soundstage.
The ls50 is "easy", has good bass but has also living mids and highs. The bass not massing the sound.
Good job-good test! Best regards!
In this test, the Evo 4.2 clinch it for me. The LS50 just cannot compete with the same drama that the Evo's bring. But that is no big surprise, since the Evo's are a bigger box, with three seperate drivers. They sounded bigger, fuller, and just more accomplished than the LS50's.
That said, in another test against a pair of Monitor Audio Bronze 2's, the LS50's sounded much more open and forward than the Bronze 2's, especially with vocals and strings. So a more pronounced mid range too, than the Bronze 2's. So all this goes to prove, that you really must listen, and make your own comparisons, before settling on a pair of speakers, because you MAY overlook the ones that got away, the one's that will blow you away when you hear them.
This is a difficult one.
Kef looks livelier, but it is not, Wharfedale Evo 4.2 is firmlier - listen to drums on first, violin on second and guitar on third song - no halo, no glear on Evo. Opinion based on listening to this clip
Great video! Thanks for taking the time to do all of this work. Where would the Klipsch RP600-M fair in all of this?
The Wharfdale just sounds a little veiled. TH-cam demos just can’t highlight what these can do in person 🎶🔊.
I agree. Based on this comparison I'd say the KEF's are more detailed.
its the bass. it goes deep and wide. its not earth shaking or screaming for attention. but its everywhere. a lot may like it. some may won't. it does make the music sound fuller and more spread out the room.
Veiled... on the 4.2... thats a good one... Lmfao!!!
I'll take the KEF's. Thank you.
The EVO has better clarity but needs another woofer to help out.
KEF R3 Vs Wharfedale Evo 4.2 ?
meta sound big actually! Bass happening..
It physically can`t. 80Hz Frequency Response on spec. Even R3 lack Bass. 4.2 too
Very close between the two. Really up to preference. Great Review!
More bass control for Kef.
Kef’s cases are like concrete, with tight bass and great highs, but above all they are stunning with a powerful warm sounding amp.
Not all KEF cabinets.
@@Tharbamar exactly, I mean the LS50 case
Evo for me
By far the best sound demo videos on the web, Thanx a lot
KEF R3 vs Wharfedale EVO 4.2 if you can in the future. That would be interesting.
I waiting for R3 Meta as it will have more bass than LS50
@@kevinweber5129 me too was already a 5 star giant killer at 2k
@@kevinweber5129 are there really any plans to realese the KEF R3 metas?
@@kevinweber5129 it already does
This time Kef produced well define bass while Evo produced over hang bass full of resonance! It was so surprised!
How do you know it's not the room modes? The Evo go lower in frequency and so they can excite room modes that the Kef can't, and room modes reverberate.
Evo more balanced sound from top to bottom. Would not be fatigued as quickly.
ls50 meta check 16:28 and 18:41
Focal Aria 906 is a better deal and sound better than both in my opinion.
7:32 vs 10:04 is a great comparison. Evo wins for mine. Thanks for the sample. Plenty of reviews with opinions but with good headphones i can hear the difference here. Although i thinkn the KEF's are great the added bass and fullness of the Evo's put it ahead.
Perhaps you can get a sense of it through your headphones any way, but I wonder whether the imaging ability from KEF’s coaxial driver would outweigh the Wharfedale’s dominance with the low end frequencies.
I love my harbeth monitor 30.2 😆
Initial impressions…Wharfedale’s sound better, specifically with the snare drum ..more natural resonance comes thru on the Wharfedale’s better
Strangely both sound exaclty like my Beoplay H9 Gen 3 headset which I am just wearing.
@@MyIDIsNotAvailable Sems like someone didn‘t get the joke
They both sound like crap through my phone speaker!
Absolutely, all music sound terrible with phone speakers but why would anyone listen to music on phone speakers?
@@Tharbamar exactly! Like those people compare speakers by listening to TH-cam!
Your videos are awesome. No begging people, just good info.
Kinda prefer the KEFs actually for it's better highs and airier sounding + well defined bass
Great review, thank you! How far from the back wall do the Evos have to be? thanks!
If I remember it right it’s about a little over 3ft, thanks
Hello @Tharbamar! I really appreciate your content. I have a question. I really did appreciate the evos combined with my denon pma2010AE. I just wanted to go up a knotch in the quality of my sound and some people recomended me to get better speakers. So I sold the evos and i still have the same amp. What speakers do you think would bring more value to this amp, above the evos, in the 2k price range? I will mention that I paid around 500$ for the evos in my country. So they aren't as expensive as in the US. Also, I am listening to all kinds of music. I am the kind of person who appreciates the feeling that a song gives you, so I don't have a fav genere, to say so. Thank you and I wish you the best!
I would suggest you to try B&W 706 S3/705 S2, KEF R3 Meta or R3 and KLH Model 3 should pair well with the amplifier you have, thanks
@@Tharbamar If i could get the r7 for 2k, you would recomend them over the metas? I have the space for them.
Sure Meta is just slightly better in details.
If you could, being that both are great speakers, would you keep both speakers in your listening room without having to choose the best of both? One week or month, eg. you would hear the EVOs and then the next week or month the LS50 Metas? Is it a wise choice or a senseless one?
I understand your thoughts, which I do as well but I would suggest you to try just KEF R3 for the better sound, frequency response and power handling, thanks
I have the regular wired LS50. Some songs sound amazing. Some songs sound thin and weak. I never know which until I play a song. I do have a B&W AS300 sub. Another great review.
Same for me, although for £540 they're a phenomenal speaker and much better (to my ear anyway) then the similarly priced Tannoy floor standers that I previously had. Apparently the Meta's are even better.
That's the recording for you they ars not all equal unfortunately. I'm not a fan of the ls50 to me they are boom boxes .
@@justinparkman3585 That's an absurd statement. My LS50's with my two REL T5i' subs sound superb. A true full range sound.
@@andrewcopley6454 that's OK till you hear something from the likes of ATC
Can you do a comparison between kef r3 and Evo 4.2? I know the let R3 is twice the price but it would be really interesting. As usual the review was very well structured and detailed.
Price doesn't control quality of sound. Technology does. The ribbon beats all conventional tweeters
Kef R3 have no bass. Evo 4.2 too
Here is a good Reviewer . Showing you Frequency response as well as Dynamics , no bulshit this bulshit that play it
And what i take from it is the Image Precision of LS50 , GOD DAMN you just cant beat the coaxial driver .
I can hear it over you tube .
Also my table is shaking more with LS 50 , whats that around 50hz , and look at the graph , there it is , boost at lowest range .
So the Graph is trust worthy , and im sure Phase Graph would show how it is Superior
However , i still like 3 way for its dynamics and loudness .
Cant decide .
Just by the looks and knowledge of components, overhyped and emotionless flat vocal nonmusical KEF can't compete.
They both sound nice and open but the wharfedale has better/more accurate midbass and deeper bass. The best version of the KEF though is the Active Wireless version.
The LS50 Meta can sound awfully bright to me. The Evo 4.2 sound warmer and more balanced.
I can assure you that the Kef’s are not bright at all. I’ve heard lots of very expensive hi end loudspeakers, and they all are as bright or mostly brighter sounding than the Meta’s.
And… the Meta’s are very different than the old LS50’s. The original LS50’s are too bright sounding in some songs, not all.
Tharbamar, great review as always! Based on your review I bought Evo4.2 and couldn’t be happier! Very well made and sound is great! One thing is bothering me: Regarding the phase plug on the woofer, you said (and show) that it is real phase plug, but on my Evo phase plug is moving with cone!? Can you please investigate, did wharfedale change woofer in recent production of Evo4.2?
Your question is only Whatfedale can answer, thanks
Same here. The cone is moving.
TopMotor Revolution Good! Not that I’m complaining - I’m just curious! More than satisfy with performance of Evo 4.2
Yes they did change them, they found a few more Hz depth by coupling the cone to the diaphragm and allowing freer movement
LS50 Meta super clear, crispy!! the Evo too muddy flat sound.
KEF LS50 is very nice but kinda high in base and sibilance. At first KEF wins but in long listening...I can last better with Wharfedale Evo. Balance...sweet sound, no extra just good sounding, good musicality overall. IMHO.
Wharfedale great speakers and for the people that want good music quality at a affordable price without costing the earth
Well said. Thanks
It sounds like he's saying KEF LS50 Matter
Why is the video cutting off at 12:26? =\
I had to cut the end part due to copyright issues.
I have a quick compare Evo 4.2 with Kanto Tuk in a same setting. Evo 4.2 has a balance sound, but mid-bass have a bit tail & hum. Totally Kanto Tuk in a smaller shape but it has a amazing sound. Fantastic Bass, and dynamic.
Evo all day.
Just get Wharfedale 9.1's and save a whole load of money -- and also get a fantastically good set of speakers! :0)
OB dipoles FTW, start thinking outside the box and ask Santa for a pair of Spatial M3 Sapphires
Yeah, I was saving pennies for M3 Saphires then wife decided she didn’t like M3 finish options so she authorized X5’s nutmeg finish!!! :o)
@@mickywes3733 Oh swoon, nice. I have last years M3 Triode Masters where the 3d theatre soundstage is worth every penny
thank you for your review. I really have a little fever for that evo 4.2. I have Wharfedale Denton 80th Anniversary and I have been liking them but that Evo is in my mind still.. :)
Just heard the ATC SCM19 v2 bookshelf speakers. Would love to hear your thoughts on those and an audio comparison/sound demo, if you can get your hands them.
Were they amazing? For 4k a pair they better be close
in P1 the Kef`s bass it`s out of this world. evo -1
7:46 vs 10:18
The Evo 4.2 sweet sounding and balance.
Hai sir
I have marantz pm6007 amp
Below which speaker is perfect matching
Klipsch rp600
Wharfedale evo 4.2
Ls 50
Pls reply
RP600 or LS50 is best match with Marantz Amps.
13:16 vs 15:18
I have the 4.2’s paired with a Rotel 1572 and blue sound node 2i. I couldn’t be a more happy.
Funny you say that... I heard the 50 Metas with the Rotel 1572 and loved it... but wasn't able to test the 4.2's on the same amp, which was very frustrating lol. Glad to hear you enjoy the combination, as this is what I'm thinking of getting :)
@@yewfh-oz7in I recently purchased the Loxjie DAC and it’s an absolutely amazing combination.
The ls50's definitely got that punch down over the warfdale. At least in this medium.
EVO He has 3-way crosses and this is very harmful. Let's not talk bullshit. Half always wins
Quality wise. I have read multiple reviews, and the people, have mentioned, THE EVO gets a bit cranky, and tone of of the speaker changes over time. What would be your concerns,? I am moving from a B%W 685 set to these. Am I gaining, or losing anything in the process? Thanks for your advice, in advance. > Mark
Here is better buy
Marvelous Polk Audio Reserve R200 Speaker Review
th-cam.com/video/Ikw8a49hvgw/w-d-xo.html
No comparison.. kef is miles ahead in sound quality.
LS50 meta win.
Five stars in what hifi !
Kef are absolutly unforgiving, with an oustanding midrange, the treble are well centered and expressive but unfortunelly lacks in bass, is too "flat" imho, at the other hand the evos lacks in midrange, bur both treble and bass are outstanding for the size, and very good for the price.
Another sound speaker from Wharfedale..
The KEFs sound a bit more forwarding, warmer and more pricise in midrange. I like the sound of the KEFs a little better but i would never pay 500$ more.
They are way too overpriced. Normal LS50s are on sale for about 600€ all the time here in Germany. 1500$ for the Meta is not a fair deal
Totally agree.
600€ all the time? WHERE exactly?
@@Rebel5406 Actually not exactly 600€ but for 666€ all the time but they are often at sale
you can say your clothes are over priced. your 20 dollar t shirt cost what? like 1 dollar to make...
KEF all made in China nowadays
EVO hat more harder punch(bit)
What about 4:1....those 4.2 are a bit big for me
That's what she said :-)
LS50 is too "naked" sounding and Evo sounds too veiled. A balance somewhere between the two speakers is preferable IMO.
I bought the old Evo II about 3 or 4 years ago, I got swindled 700 USD for the pair due to lack of research (the new Evo 4 was already out) but I picked it over the new Diamond 10. Anyway I picked it for the warmth smoothness and soundstage, the speaker was not exciting and the imaging was ok but the it makes every bad recording sound good.
Kef have done a great work whit just one cone speaker.... But the wharfdale have a better more open sound.. Its not fair to judge a 3.way against a 1.way speaker... If want a smal cheaper then is the kef what you go after.. Thanks for the session 👍🙏
KEF is Two way speaker.
Those wharfedales all day long
Evo 4.2 is 560euros and Kef LS50 Meta is 1150 euros so??? In my country. My choice will be definitely Evo! GREAT SPEAKER!
Evo is Great buy.
Personal taste listening through headphones on this video.....meta wins