@@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
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.
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 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
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.
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 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 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.
Believe it or not, some people are willing to pay more for a smaller, and subjectively better looking speakers. Even if they are meaningfully worse quality while still remaining “top tier.” If the KEF speakers were Bose sound quality, sure I’d take the uglier speakers. But this isn’t that. Modest sized apartment/condo living people who want very nice speakers to be more heard than forcibly seen probably would get the KEF.
I listened to the LS50 Metas as well as the Evo 4.2 and liked the Evos a tad better! I use a pair of KEF LSX for near field while I'm working, for my living room I got myself a pair of Evo 4.3s , they sound simply amazing, especially for the price!
@@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 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.
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.
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.. :)
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 :)
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
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.
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.
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!
I love to compare a track by its balance between vocal and music.. so i would choose LS50 Meta since the vocal sounds clearly without distracting the hi frequency resonances from the musical.
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.
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.
The denon pm11 is the bad boy here if you use kef ls50 meta try at least an higher end hegel amp denon pm11 is to warm ive heard them Both just try an hegel amp and you will be thankfull by the way your reviews are Super!!! Great work
Wharfedales all the way. Better base and a more even sound than the forward, bright sound of the Kefs. I also prefer a warmer sound. I have purchased the 4.2’s and would do the same based on this comparison. Thank you for a great demo.
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 👍🙏
Wharfedale are from the UK and have been around for more than 80+ years. I like their speakers, generally understated, and good all-around sound. Not the fanciest stuff, but GOOD quality and GOOD sounding! The are are also reputable for the budget conscience listener.
From what I hear through my 6xx, the LS50 Meta seems much more resolving in the lower mids and mids ... They don't go as low but none of these are truly full range. But add a pair of sealed subs and the LS50 Meta system becomes a really thoroughly resolving system without much wholes in the frequency response.
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.
At the moment I'm in the middle of auditioning ls50 s and even though there impressive, I don't think I'm able to listen to them for long periods of time (too bright) but to be honest I think I'll end up sending them back because I prefer speakers where I'm able to listen to my music for hours on end!. I enjoyed this video so thanks for posting and by the way your English is better than mine but the funny thing is English is my first language! Lol
@@Cooliewhistles the KEF ls50 originals! If you click on the cat you can actually hear how bright there are especially compared to my other standmounts.....
I have the Evo 4.2. They are a little warmer sounding for all listening in my opinion. I have them paired with a Simaudio moon 240i integrated and they sound killer. I did have them running off my Marantz before i got the moon integrated and sound was too warm. The evo are a more warm sounding speaker. The moon is very natural.
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.
Thanks for the interesting test. The Wharfedale Evo 4.2 has a cleaner sound. The KEF acoustics constantly have a low-frequency hum. Wharfedale is certainly the best.
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.
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
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.
Great, like your honest comments, especially how unforgiving the speakers are, as some people mentioned here the Evo 4.2 sounded veiled especially on the bass tonal balance, matter of fact I prefer my Denton 80th on overall integrated sound, I kinda agree with them, but I'm not 100% sure yet, I will see how it sound again to match with detailed & transparent amp like NAD M22 power amp.
Please tell me you will be reviewing the Wharfdale Aura 2. I would really like to see what you think about them. I recently purchased them and they are quite extraordinary.
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?
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
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.
So far Denton 80th is better for me (treble a little bit better, bass tonal balance is greater), feel that there is a flaw design to the bass driver of Evo 4.2 (never like phase port, limited elasticity), it's kinda same situation to me there is a flaw tweeter design to Denton 85th & Linton.
@@wim1983 same goes to me. Denton 80th so far serves me well. However different person has different preference. Overall i think Denton is warmer and laid back. Non fatigue.
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
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.
Due to a physical implementation, ribbon tweeters like in Evo, work perfect only in a close field. When you sit quite distant, you have to add 5-10dB to them. This is why the best configuration in case of Evo 4.2 would be an active crossover with a gain control, and tri-amping (what I'm going to build soon -)
@@MrSplit57 bi-amping allows to use an amp that matches a speaker at 100% (fr, output impedance, feedback type, gain, etc).. In all cases multi-amping can provide better results than just passive filters. With no exceptions.
These are not ribbon tweeters and don't sound like them either. They are air motion tweeters which is a different implementation. Google to find out more information.
@@richarddavis1025 Thanks. I cannot find any info about drives used with Evo 4.2. And AMT has about the same sound radiation pattern as ribbon tweeters have.
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.
I wonder what would have been the outcome if the Metas had been paired with a Marantz amp. I pair mine with PM12SE a warm sounding amp. The brightness in highs isn’t detectable as much. Metas need very careful pairing choices - powerful and warm sounding. For that I’d give the edge to the Evos since they are much easier to live with (no need of a sub either).
I hear you but you don’t know how PMA-SX11 sound, my main speaker is KEF R11 there is no brightness whatsoever paring with them, Meta is good but not great for everyone sensitive to bright sound, thanks
@@Tharbamar I think the main problem with the Metas is they are hard to drive. They aren’t real 8om speakers. To get good sound out of them, you need an amp doubling or tripling the price. I ended up driving them using my main amp (Diablo 300). They sound much better but then what’s the point?
@@chenqixue8151 Denon PMA-SX11 is more powerful than you may think, it can deliver 240 amp of current when is needed, not many power amps can deliver that kind of current and power rating is way under rated as well.
@@Tharbamar do you recommend spending more than ifi on power cord? My research seems to suggest good shielding is important. Other factors are more a change in tonic characteristics. I’m a little tempted to give high end cables a try but wanted to consult you
Need to hear those KEF's in person but I really like the openess of them. That cello sounded like it was in the room while the Evo sounded like it was still coming from the box imo. I might have to see which KEF I can afford.
I am a beginner to this hobby. Maybe because I am nearing my retirement and can now spend more leisure time. I am so attracted to this Evo 4.2 especially with how you described them. I am planning a simple 3.1 setup. It will be for movies and music. What AVR do you suggest with a 3.1 setup on Evo 4.2? Thanks in advance and more power to your channel.
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 think your room really works with the meta... Must be nice there I get some crazy imaging even here remotely... Compare LS50 and LS50 meta in that room?
Matthew Pool I'm sure the placement is harming the sound from the Metas. With such a curved baffle the LS 50s need room to breath and since the Metas are behind Evos, that early bounce off the Evos has to mess up the balance and overall sound quality. He does a great job in his comparisons and it would be a hassle to move speakers every time he switched, so I not complaining. I just know from experience how finicky the LS 50s are, but when you get it right it makes a huge difference.
@@gordthor5351 Wow. They sound really good even with that placement. I definitely want to hear them in person some day. I've had R3's for a couple years now and just recently set up a Q150 nearfield desk setup which I love! I'm definitely KEF fan!
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
I like Wharfedale Evo 4.2 for my taste. Very natural and well blended.
The audio sample recording are worth a million words. Thank you! 💜
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.
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
Bless for your personal apporach and not trying to theorize for the listener. I value the journey and can theorize for myself.
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
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.
evo sounds like it's in the bottom of a cave ...
@@Florentin3 Kef R3's are not bright when paired with the right amps.
The BEST, Evo 4.2. for me.
By far the best sound demo videos on the web, Thanx a lot
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?
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
I'd pick the LS50! Amazing and complete review. Thanks!
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.
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.
Believe it or not, some people are willing to pay more for a smaller, and subjectively better looking speakers. Even if they are meaningfully worse quality while still remaining “top tier.”
If the KEF speakers were Bose sound quality, sure I’d take the uglier speakers. But this isn’t that. Modest sized apartment/condo living people who want very nice speakers to be more heard than forcibly seen probably would get the KEF.
Thanks so much for your superb review. LS50 meta would be my choice. Very nice demo too.
Very close between the two. Really up to preference. Great Review!
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 KEF sounds more forward sounding to my ears. I just ordered the Wharfdale Evo 4.2's. Can't wait to hear them. Thanks for your all your reviews
The kef sounds lucious... Appreciate the effort u put in....👍
I listened to the LS50 Metas as well as the Evo 4.2 and liked the Evos a tad better! I use a pair of KEF LSX for near field while I'm working, for my living room I got myself a pair of Evo 4.3s , they sound simply amazing, especially for the price!
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.
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.
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
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.. :)
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.
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
KEF is the best sound for me
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.
Your videos are awesome. No begging people, just good info.
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
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!
The Evo 4.2 sweet sounding and balance.
I love to compare a track by its balance between vocal and music.. so i would choose LS50 Meta since the vocal sounds clearly without distracting the hi frequency resonances from the musical.
The Evo made my TV shake with bass and sounded better. 😁😉
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.
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.
The denon pm11 is the bad boy here if you use kef ls50 meta try at least an higher end hegel amp denon pm11 is to warm ive heard them Both just try an hegel amp and you will be thankfull by the way your reviews are Super!!! Great work
I tried Hegel H590 before SX11 and it don’t impress me to be honest, cheaply made quality with ok sound for the price.
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.
Love the new amp ! Big improvement over previous amps.
this is my next speakers.tharbamer evos 4.2 .beautifully finished .love your videos .😊😊😊
Wharfedales all the way. Better base and a more even sound than the forward, bright sound of the Kefs. I also prefer a warmer sound. I have purchased the 4.2’s and would do the same based on this comparison. Thank you for a great demo.
The meta aren't forward like the original ls50, a coaxial arrangement also sounds more natural in my opinion.
How the hell hard is it to spell "bass" for you idiots?
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.
Never heard Wharfedale before, but speak they have. These are as good as they are acclaimed to be.
Wharfedale are from the UK and have been around for more than 80+ years. I like their speakers, generally understated, and good all-around sound. Not the fanciest stuff, but GOOD quality and GOOD sounding! The are are also reputable for the budget conscience listener.
Nice choice of tracks very clear differences thanks
From what I hear through my 6xx, the LS50 Meta seems much more resolving in the lower mids and mids ... They don't go as low but none of these are truly full range.
But add a pair of sealed subs and the LS50 Meta system becomes a really thoroughly resolving system without much wholes in the frequency response.
Exactly what I was thinking.
I think they are both crap ! They would drive me nuts !
You don't want to mix vented and sealed due to phase incoherence
@@r423fplip well when I heard the female voice it was over for me, both have sibilance problems
Great video! Thanks for taking the time to do all of this work. Where would the Klipsch RP600-M fair in all of this?
Kinda prefer the KEFs actually for it's better highs and airier sounding + well defined bass
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.
I'll take the KEF's. Thank you.
At the moment I'm in the middle of auditioning ls50 s and even though there impressive, I don't think I'm able to listen to them for long periods of time (too bright) but to be honest I think I'll end up sending them back because I prefer speakers where I'm able to listen to my music for hours on end!. I enjoyed this video so thanks for posting and by the way your English is better than mine but the funny thing is English is my first language! Lol
i hear that, evo better since not fatiguing
Do you have the original or meta ??
@@Cooliewhistles the KEF ls50 originals! If you click on the cat you can actually hear how bright there are especially compared to my other standmounts.....
I have the Evo 4.2. They are a little warmer sounding for all listening in my opinion. I have them paired with a Simaudio moon 240i integrated and they sound killer. I did have them running off my Marantz before i got the moon integrated and sound was too warm. The evo are a more warm sounding speaker. The moon is very natural.
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.
Wharfedale great speakers and for the people that want good music quality at a affordable price without costing the earth
Well said. Thanks
Wharfedale EVO 4.2 the music embraces you.
KEF LS 50 Meta the music confronts you.
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
The EVO has better clarity but needs another woofer to help out.
Thanks for the interesting test. The Wharfedale Evo 4.2 has a cleaner sound. The KEF acoustics constantly have a low-frequency hum. Wharfedale is certainly the best.
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.
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
Why is the video cutting off at 12:26? =\
I had to cut the end part due to copyright issues.
Hello, where can we find these very pretty acoustic panels ? Please 👋
Getting a pair of whafedale today 😊 new used for 550$.
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 love my harbeth monitor 30.2 😆
Great, like your honest comments, especially how unforgiving the speakers are, as some people mentioned here the Evo 4.2 sounded veiled especially on the bass tonal balance, matter of fact I prefer my Denton 80th on overall integrated sound, I kinda agree with them, but I'm not 100% sure yet, I will see how it sound again to match with detailed & transparent amp like NAD M22 power amp.
Please tell me you will be reviewing the Wharfdale Aura 2. I would really like to see what you think about them. I recently purchased them and they are quite extraordinary.
No plan at this time, thanks
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
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
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
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
Evo more balanced sound from top to bottom. Would not be fatigued as quickly.
If you are going have a speaker stand and use it as your mains might as well have towers
I have too many speakers, please see my latest video, thanks
Evo 4.2 are in my short list. I am torn between them or Dentons, modern vs classical look, tips are welcomed.
So far Denton 80th is better for me (treble a little bit better, bass tonal balance is greater), feel that there is a flaw design to the bass driver of Evo 4.2 (never like phase port, limited elasticity), it's kinda same situation to me there is a flaw tweeter design to Denton 85th & Linton.
@@wim1983 same goes to me. Denton 80th so far serves me well. However different person has different preference. Overall i think Denton is warmer and laid back. Non fatigue.
At first it was the KEFs for me, but after a few back and forths the Wharfdales took it for me.
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
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.
KEF R3 Vs Wharfedale Evo 4.2 ?
Evo for me
Due to a physical implementation, ribbon tweeters like in Evo, work perfect only in a close field. When you sit quite distant, you have to add 5-10dB to them. This is why the best configuration in case of Evo 4.2 would be an active crossover with a gain control, and tri-amping (what I'm going to build soon -)
sc0or whould bi-amping help anything for the amt tweeter?
@@MrSplit57 bi-amping allows to use an amp that matches a speaker at 100% (fr, output impedance, feedback type, gain, etc).. In all cases multi-amping can provide better results than just passive filters. With no exceptions.
Funny. I was thinking along those lines. If Wharfedale decided to builf something like the Burchardt 500 they have all the parts.
These are not ribbon tweeters and don't sound like them either. They are air motion tweeters which is a different implementation. Google to find out more information.
@@richarddavis1025 Thanks. I cannot find any info about drives used with Evo 4.2. And AMT has about the same sound radiation pattern as ribbon tweeters have.
The ls50's definitely got that punch down over the warfdale. At least in this medium.
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
Hi, great comparison, for me Kef sounds richer , deeper, more detailed, like noiseless, thank You for sharing, best wishes.
I’m on the KEF train. I think if you pair them with a nice sub it would be damn near perfect for me
kef kc62 for looks and sound
@@stanleysmith3706 it does look nice but I have like a 30 x 20 room with vaulted ceilings so I fear it’s too small for my space
@@pmizz7959 than both of these bookshelf speaker is also too small for ur space
@@stanleysmith3706 doesn’t feel that way when I am listening to them. Oh well. It’s what I got now. Happy with them
@@pmizz7959 i am still listening to a very old a pair of b&w 602 s3 so you ahve better ,newer gears than me
Zwei tolle Lautsprecher!
Which is good sound comes in gaming-watching movies-listening rock music and r&b songs?✌️
in P1 the Kef`s bass it`s out of this world. evo -1
Meta and Mqa, the saviour of music, if you believe the hype !!!
Meta tech is great for noise reducing, MQA just new version of louder equalized music.
Never liked the sound of the Kef ls50.
Great review Tharbamar!!what's your opinion about Mission's loudspeakers?specially TVE QX-2??? Thanks!
I wonder what would have been the outcome if the Metas had been paired with a Marantz amp. I pair mine with PM12SE a warm sounding amp. The brightness in highs isn’t detectable as much. Metas need very careful pairing choices - powerful and warm sounding. For that I’d give the edge to the Evos since they are much easier to live with (no need of a sub either).
I hear you but you don’t know how PMA-SX11 sound, my main speaker is KEF R11 there is no brightness whatsoever paring with them, Meta is good but not great for everyone sensitive to bright sound, thanks
@@Tharbamar I think the main problem with the Metas is they are hard to drive. They aren’t real 8om speakers. To get good sound out of them, you need an amp doubling or tripling the price. I ended up driving them using my main amp (Diablo 300). They sound much better but then what’s the point?
@@chenqixue8151 Denon PMA-SX11 is more powerful than you may think, it can deliver 240 amp of current when is needed, not many power amps can deliver that kind of current and power rating is way under rated as well.
@@Tharbamar do you recommend spending more than ifi on power cord? My research seems to suggest good shielding is important. Other factors are more a change in tonic characteristics. I’m a little tempted to give high end cables a try but wanted to consult you
Need to hear those KEF's in person but I really like the openess of them. That cello sounded like it was in the room while the Evo sounded like it was still coming from the box imo. I might have to see which KEF I can afford.
I fell like its the opposite, the kef pushed the cello forward, while the evos displayed it as it would sound in person
Just my view :)
Great review 👍👍👍
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
I am a beginner to this hobby. Maybe because I am nearing my retirement and can now spend more leisure time. I am so attracted to this Evo 4.2 especially with how you described them. I am planning a simple 3.1 setup. It will be for movies and music. What AVR do you suggest with a 3.1 setup on Evo 4.2? Thanks in advance and more power to your channel.
I would try something from Yamaha or Denon to pair with Evo series, thank you.
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.
I appreciate for video! Evo 4.2 sounds better for me.
LS50 Meta super clear, crispy!! the Evo too muddy flat sound.
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.
Evo all day.
I think your room really works with the meta... Must be nice there I get some crazy imaging even here remotely... Compare LS50 and LS50 meta in that room?
Matthew Pool I'm sure the placement is harming the sound from the Metas. With such a curved baffle the LS 50s need room to breath and since the Metas are behind Evos, that early bounce off the Evos has to mess up the balance and overall sound quality. He does a great job in his comparisons and it would be a hassle to move speakers every time he switched, so I not complaining. I just know from experience how finicky the LS 50s are, but when you get it right it makes a huge difference.
@@gordthor5351 Wow. They sound really good even with that placement. I definitely want to hear them in person some day. I've had R3's for a couple years now and just recently set up a Q150 nearfield desk setup which I love! I'm definitely KEF fan!
Just get Wharfedale 9.1's and save a whole load of money -- and also get a fantastically good set of speakers! :0)