These have similar sound signatures but the Metas are more highly resolving without being brighter. Just listen to the vocals in Higher Love as a good example. Thanks for doing this!
Switching to the Meta is like opening a 3rd dimension and matured sound. No bad about the Q150, but it's clearly not in the same leaque, nor does it suppose to be. Credits to the amp too. Don't know why but this demo sounds extremely good.
Completely honest here. I listen to many videos on this channel and can hear differences on my phone speaker which is why I appreciate this channel so much. However, in this case I don't hear much of a difference between the two speakers except a bit more open treble on the metas. The q150s from my experience are quite amp sensitive so it would also be interesting to hear this comparison using a different amp.
I was seriously considering moving to the LS50 from my Q150s... but I'm not certain that's the right move after listening to this. The LS50s sound a little more open, but not enough to warrant their price tag over the Q150 (to me). Also, I've been driving a sub since day 1 and had no idea these produce as much bass as they apparently do.
I have both and its not possible to hear the unbelievable magic of the ls50 meta playing through other speakers. Yes they both have similar frequency response curves and sound characteristics but the ls50 is breathtakingly detailed yet smooth and not fatiguing. With the ls50 if you close your eyes it feels like the instruments are being played in front of you, with the q150 it sounds like I'm listening to very nice speakers. Part of what probably makes the ls50 wireless 2 so great is its internal fully active dsp amplifier which powers each tweeter and woofer independently without any passive crossovers and the tuning kef have done on the dsp.
It sure does! It's definitely my favorite place on TH-cam. So, it's up to all of us to tell everyone we know that's interested in audio, to help him grow the channel. Ok everyone?
I don't know what kind of mic you are using, but the differences in amps, speakers, are audible on my Skullcandy headphones. Thanks for these video's, love it, reminds me of the old days when you could jump into a high fi store and listen to the sonic differences. Even been comparing amplifiers from different videos. :)
I 'm thinking I prefer these Q150s to the Q350s. You get more sound from the box with the cheaper KEFs and the drivers aren't quite as polished as on the Metas but not bad. The Metas shine in the upper mids, while staying flat. Kef must have put a ton of work into the Metas to get them this polished.
Of course it is, but it had better be at almost five times the sale price of $350 for the Q150. At that price the Q150 is a very good sounding little box, and can ceetainly hold its own against similarly priced speakers. I'm actually suprised at how close the 150 sounds to the Metas, and its overall sound signature is closer to the Metas to my ears than the 350 is, which sounds more different to the Metas than the 150 does to me
@@DougMen1 The Q150 was created as a budget LS50, just to see how far they could stretch it, within a certain budget. Same (speaker) size, etc. They did a nice job apparently 😄 If I'm not mistaken, there was an interview with KEF's chief whatever about that by Audiophile.
I'm surprised here, as the Q150 sounds closer to the Metas to me than the 350s do, which sound warmer and softer on top. At their sale price of $350, the 150s are a very good buy. At their regular price of $600, they then face some stiff competition from several other very good speakers, like the Elac DBR62 which we just heard here in two videos
The Metas are better...Doy. Clarity and definition are largely superior... Der. It's also more balanced with the Arcam SA10 than it is with a lot of other amps. The Q150 not so much, and yet the Q150 is possibly more neutraly balanced than the Meta in this comparison. That makes the Meta's not better in every single way.
Test Setup: Presonus Studio 26c audio interface Audio Technica ATH-M50xSTS headphone with built-in microphone (XLR version) I can hear the difference in the bass department (the Q150 wins for me here) but for the LS50 Meta, I cannot hear high frequencies above 10kHz. I'm wearing my hearing aids due to my hearing disability. I even put a 100Hz high-pass filter in the signal chain and even I cannot hear much of a difference even besides the soundstage in Fields. I would gladly save a lot of money and get a Q150 and maybe upgrade my home theater receiver from Denon X3400H to Onkyo TX-RZ50 receiver or get an Emotiva BasX 7-channel amplififer. My home theater setup is as follows (in additon to the Denon AVR I just mentioned): Polk T50 floorstanding speakers (purchased about a decade ago) Insignia NS-B2111 speakers (cheap; purchased around 2009 or so) I do have a cheap Pioneer center channel that was purchased around the same time as my insignia speakers, but I don't have it with me since I travel with my family and I do not have enough room for a center channel) Klipsch SW1000 subwoofer (recent purchase; better than a cheap Velodyne subwoofer that I purchased around 2006 or so) And that's about it. My primary source for my home theater is my PC connected to my LG C2 TV via HDMI 2.1, my TV connects to the audio extractor since my X3400H receiver does not support eARC, and my receiver handles any sources that support HDMi 2.0 or earlier such as my Zidoo Z9X Pro and my Nintendo Switch. I honestly won't hear a difference if I go from X3400H to X3800H. Speaking of home theater, it would be nice to hear the difference in movies between the two KEF speakers without risking a copyright claim/strike.
Same. Just give them a slight treble push on the EQ. And you basically get the same sound. And I've heard both in person. Very little in it. Certainly not nearly a grand😂
Neither speaker sounds much different through the headphones. If you were there, you might perceive a difference in the sense of presence and sound resolution.
This is the first time Ive see anyone say the Q150s are more neutral than Metas. Hahahahahahahahahahahaa! Thats what you get when you use your oh-so-reliable golden ears and dont rely on hard data. Perfect example of why measurements matter, so that you dont get ridiculous statements like these. Even trained listeners from Harman wont claim such a thing. Golden ears, golden ears everywhere.
You know what Mark? I've tried to be nice to you lately, but you're arrogant self-important audio snobbery isn't welcome here. You have every right to hear things the way you do, as do others, and until you can listen with someone else's ears, then you have no idea how what they hear may differ from what you hear. So, take your immature superiority complex and STFU! Because everytime you act like a insecure and spoiled little baby, I'm gonna call you out on it. And you obviously are insecure, because you feel the need to prove every chance you get to tell everyone how superior you are to everyone else, and that isn't the actions of someone who is confident and self assured, but of someone who is clinically suffering from an inferiority complex and has to constantly pump themself up to feel important and try to overcome that inferiority complex. You're a small and petty little man with the emotional maturity of a child, no better than James Brown
@@DougMen1 im goin to keep this short and sweet. Liking a certain type of sound is one thing, claiming false statements that can be proven otherwise is another. Everytime someone claims something that data shows to be false, IM going to call them out for it. Nothing childish about calling someone out when they are claiming something the total opposite of what data shows. Its year 2021, when 'audiophiles' and 'golden ears' gets debunked everytime they claim something false. Calling bs out isnt childish as you put it, far from it. Take your time to reflect on what is being said here.
@@DougMen1 and do you even know what is audio snobbery? Thats telling people that what you dont like persoanlly is wrong. That is the definition of audio snobbery. When there is data and prove of what someone is claiming is totally false, calling them out is totally not audio snobbery but putting things back where they belong. You wished for bs to circle in this field, I wished for the total opposite. Too much bs has been flaoting around costing people real money, its time for people to put their money where their mouths are, prove it or stfu. I have nothing against you, but when you start backing bs up, I will take my stand. Show me where the Q150 is more neutral than the Meta and Ill show you 5 times the amount of data youve shown me that they are not.
@@AbsoluteFidelity That isn't the point Mark. It isn't what you say that I take offense with, but how you say it. Learn to be respectful and diplomatic. You can act like a civilized adult instead of like a petulant spoiled and immature little child. That's what I always take offense with from you, nothing else. We've gotten along very well lately and had good conversations because you've acted civil and didn't get childish and act like a little boy on a playground. As far as measurements, they are useful and may mean everything to you, but not all people feel that way, and they may feel that liking what they hear is more important than perfect measurements. One of my favorite speakers is the Klipsch La Scala, and I have no doubt that it probably doesn't measure as well as many less costly speakers. But, it has such an effortless delivery and sounds from it are so immediate that it brings the performer right into the room with you, at least to my ears. And to me that is extremely enjoyable. This audio hobby is about enjoyment, we're not talking about medical equipment or other scientific devices where perfect accuracy means everything. Yes, in the studio, where you're monitoring and mixing recordings, then accuracy is very important. But, you shouldn't look down on and denigrate those who may like a sound that deviates from accuracy if it gives them more enjoyment, because the most inportant thing is having the gear that gives you the most enjoyment and fun when listening to your favorite music, whether that's gear that is neutral and deadly accurate or whether it's gear that isn't. And, we know that measurements don't tell the whole story. Yes, if a speaker has a huge hole in the response somewhere it's going to sound bad, or if it has a tweeter that's 10db louder than the woofer, like many B&Ws, that's going to be unbearable too. But, you can't tell me that there aren't speakers that mesure nearly the same yet sound very different. That's why specs and measurements are only a guide and listening is still the final arbiter. So, let's all just be civil and show other people respect. Don't try to make people feel inferior than you because they don't always agree with you about what sounds good. Respect other people's taste in gear, no matter how much it disagrees with your taste. And when you call out inaccuracies, do it diplomatically and with civility. This is a great community that our gracious host E has provided here for us, and we've developed relationships with one another, and that makes it even more special, and more of a community, and we want to continue to build on that. So, let's respect one another, even when we choose to disagree, ok?
@@DougMen1 you seem to not understand what Im trying to get at here. I do not look down on people's taste on sound, they can like speakers that have, for example, a 20db peak @ 6khz, thats totally fine. Like a titally V shaped sound signature? No problem. Like a flactuating sound signature with huge holes and peaks all across the spectrum? I can accept that. I do not dispute that at all, there is nothing to be disputed because thats personal taste. What I dont agree is, for example again, calling a speaker that has a 20db peak @ 6hz neutral. Any statement that goes against PROVEN DATA is what Im debunking here, not personal taste. Huge difference. Its ok if anyone wants to get married to an elephant, just dont start telling me the elephant is a human when its not. I can be as civilized as when discussing personal taste, but I can be real straight forward when PROVEN DATA is twisted to fit someone's narrative. Lets keep data and personal preference separated, because data is always data but personal preference varies.
![[Sound Battle] Q Acoustics 3030i vs KEF Q350 Bookshelf Speakers w/Arcam SA10 Integrated Amp](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1cNBULVD8lk/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Sound Battle] Q Acoustics 3030i vs KEF Q350 Bookshelf Speakers w/Arcam SA10 Integrated Amp](/img/tr.png)
![[Sound Battle] Polk Audio Reserve R200 vs KEF Q150 Bookshelf Speakers w/Arcam SA10 Integrated Amp](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/im9iRBkfxMM/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Sound Battle] KEF LS50 Meta vs KEF R3 Bookshelf Speakers w/NAD C388 Integrated Amplifier](/img/n.gif)
These have similar sound signatures but the Metas are more highly resolving without being brighter. Just listen to the vocals in Higher Love as a good example. Thanks for doing this!
The metas have a metallic tinge to the tweeter. Artificially brighter= fail.
Switching to the Meta is like opening a 3rd dimension and matured sound. No bad about the Q150, but it's clearly not in the same leaque, nor does it suppose to be. Credits to the amp too.
Don't know why but this demo sounds extremely good.
Many people will find the two to be the same in terms of timbre, the q150 has better bass, while the ls150meta has a slightly more open treble.
Completely honest here. I listen to many videos on this channel and can hear differences on my phone speaker which is why I appreciate this channel so much. However, in this case I don't hear much of a difference between the two speakers except a bit more open treble on the metas. The q150s from my experience are quite amp sensitive so it would also be interesting to hear this comparison using a different amp.
I was seriously considering moving to the LS50 from my Q150s... but I'm not certain that's the right move after listening to this. The LS50s sound a little more open, but not enough to warrant their price tag over the Q150 (to me).
Also, I've been driving a sub since day 1 and had no idea these produce as much bass as they apparently do.
I have both and its not possible to hear the unbelievable magic of the ls50 meta playing through other speakers. Yes they both have similar frequency response curves and sound characteristics but the ls50 is breathtakingly detailed yet smooth and not fatiguing. With the ls50 if you close your eyes it feels like the instruments are being played in front of you, with the q150 it sounds like I'm listening to very nice speakers.
Part of what probably makes the ls50 wireless 2 so great is its internal fully active dsp amplifier which powers each tweeter and woofer independently without any passive crossovers and the tuning kef have done on the dsp.
This channel deserves much more subscribers
It sure does! It's definitely my favorite place on TH-cam. So, it's up to all of us to tell everyone we know that's interested in audio, to help him grow the channel. Ok everyone?
You deserve English lessons.
I don't know what kind of mic you are using, but the differences in amps, speakers, are audible on my Skullcandy headphones. Thanks for these video's, love it, reminds me of the old days when you could jump into a high fi store and listen to the sonic differences. Even been comparing amplifiers from different videos. :)
The KEF LS50 Meta are clearly superior.
Make this same comparison with NAD C388 that the difference in favor of the LS50 Meta will be even greater.
Maybe !
LS50 treble are better but lack of bass, overall i prefer Q150 as they are more balanced.
I 'm thinking I prefer these Q150s to the Q350s. You get more sound from the box with the cheaper KEFs and the drivers aren't quite as polished as on the Metas but not bad. The Metas shine in the upper mids, while staying flat. Kef must have put a ton of work into the Metas to get them this polished.
I have to agree iwth you. With the right amp, the Q150s are more balanced and have more clarity than the 350s, and sound even closer to the Metas
The only difference I can here is the Meta’s have a tighter imaging, but the 150’s has a little wider soundstage.
Yes but Meta have fuller sound. The q150 sounds very bright and thin in comparison.
No comparison at all and rightly so. The Meta is superior in all aspects. :)
I agree. the Meta has a nicely polished tone. very flat, nice presence. Good pairing with the SA10.
Of course it is, but it had better be at almost five times the sale price of $350 for the Q150. At that price the Q150 is a very good sounding little box, and can ceetainly hold its own against similarly priced speakers. I'm actually suprised at how close the 150 sounds to the Metas, and its overall sound signature is closer to the Metas to my ears than the 350 is, which sounds more different to the Metas than the 150 does to me
@@DougMen1
The Q150 was created as a budget LS50, just to see how far they could stretch it, within a certain budget. Same (speaker) size, etc. They did a nice job apparently 😄
If I'm not mistaken, there was an interview with KEF's chief whatever about that by Audiophile.
Meta are much more dynamic and 'punchy' in a good way
I'm surprised here, as the Q150 sounds closer to the Metas to me than the 350s do, which sound warmer and softer on top. At their sale price of $350, the 150s are a very good buy. At their regular price of $600, they then face some stiff competition from several other very good speakers, like the Elac DBR62 which we just heard here in two videos
As a Kef Engineer explained during an interview here on youtube KEF transfered all they learned from the LS line to Q150.
The Metas are better...Doy. Clarity and definition are largely superior... Der.
It's also more balanced with the Arcam SA10 than it is with a lot of other amps. The Q150 not so much, and yet the Q150 is possibly more neutraly balanced than the Meta in this comparison. That makes the Meta's not better in every single way.
Test Setup:
Presonus Studio 26c audio interface
Audio Technica ATH-M50xSTS headphone with built-in microphone (XLR version)
I can hear the difference in the bass department (the Q150 wins for me here) but for the LS50 Meta, I cannot hear high frequencies above 10kHz. I'm wearing my hearing aids due to my hearing disability. I even put a 100Hz high-pass filter in the signal chain and even I cannot hear much of a difference even besides the soundstage in Fields. I would gladly save a lot of money and get a Q150 and maybe upgrade my home theater receiver from Denon X3400H to Onkyo TX-RZ50 receiver or get an Emotiva BasX 7-channel amplififer.
My home theater setup is as follows (in additon to the Denon AVR I just mentioned):
Polk T50 floorstanding speakers (purchased about a decade ago)
Insignia NS-B2111 speakers (cheap; purchased around 2009 or so)
I do have a cheap Pioneer center channel that was purchased around the same time as my insignia speakers, but I don't have it with me since I travel with my family and I do not have enough room for a center channel)
Klipsch SW1000 subwoofer (recent purchase; better than a cheap Velodyne subwoofer that I purchased around 2006 or so)
And that's about it. My primary source for my home theater is my PC connected to my LG C2 TV via HDMI 2.1, my TV connects to the audio extractor since my X3400H receiver does not support eARC, and my receiver handles any sources that support HDMi 2.0 or earlier such as my Zidoo Z9X Pro and my Nintendo Switch. I honestly won't hear a difference if I go from X3400H to X3800H.
Speaking of home theater, it would be nice to hear the difference in movies between the two KEF speakers without risking a copyright claim/strike.
I picked up a pair of Q's for $300 with the wood grain...why pay 4x for LS150?
Same. Just give them a slight treble push on the EQ. And you basically get the same sound. And I've heard both in person. Very little in it. Certainly not nearly a grand😂
Neither speaker sounds much different through the headphones. If you were there, you might perceive a difference in the sense of presence and sound resolution.
I have my q150s with a svs sb1000pro sub. I think you would be hard pressed to justify spending just over 4.5x the price of the q150's
This is the first time Ive see anyone say the Q150s are more neutral than Metas. Hahahahahahahahahahahaa! Thats what you get when you use your oh-so-reliable golden ears and dont rely on hard data. Perfect example of why measurements matter, so that you dont get ridiculous statements like these. Even trained listeners from Harman wont claim such a thing. Golden ears, golden ears everywhere.
You know what Mark? I've tried to be nice to you lately, but you're arrogant self-important audio snobbery isn't welcome here. You have every right to hear things the way you do, as do others, and until you can listen with someone else's ears, then you have no idea how what they hear may differ from what you hear. So, take your immature superiority complex and STFU! Because everytime you act like a insecure and spoiled little baby, I'm gonna call you out on it. And you obviously are insecure, because you feel the need to prove every chance you get to tell everyone how superior you are to everyone else, and that isn't the actions of someone who is confident and self assured, but of someone who is clinically suffering from an inferiority complex and has to constantly pump themself up to feel important and try to overcome that inferiority complex. You're a small and petty little man with the emotional maturity of a child, no better than James Brown
@@DougMen1 im goin to keep this short and sweet. Liking a certain type of sound is one thing, claiming false statements that can be proven otherwise is another. Everytime someone claims something that data shows to be false, IM going to call them out for it. Nothing childish about calling someone out when they are claiming something the total opposite of what data shows. Its year 2021, when 'audiophiles' and 'golden ears' gets debunked everytime they claim something false. Calling bs out isnt childish as you put it, far from it. Take your time to reflect on what is being said here.
@@DougMen1 and do you even know what is audio snobbery? Thats telling people that what you dont like persoanlly is wrong. That is the definition of audio snobbery. When there is data and prove of what someone is claiming is totally false, calling them out is totally not audio snobbery but putting things back where they belong. You wished for bs to circle in this field, I wished for the total opposite. Too much bs has been flaoting around costing people real money, its time for people to put their money where their mouths are, prove it or stfu. I have nothing against you, but when you start backing bs up, I will take my stand. Show me where the Q150 is more neutral than the Meta and Ill show you 5 times the amount of data youve shown me that they are not.
@@AbsoluteFidelity That isn't the point Mark. It isn't what you say that I take offense with, but how you say it. Learn to be respectful and diplomatic. You can act like a civilized adult instead of like a petulant spoiled and immature little child. That's what I always take offense with from you, nothing else. We've gotten along very well lately and had good conversations because you've acted civil and didn't get childish and act like a little boy on a playground. As far as measurements, they are useful and may mean everything to you, but not all people feel that way, and they may feel that liking what they hear is more important than perfect measurements. One of my favorite speakers is the Klipsch La Scala, and I have no doubt that it probably doesn't measure as well as many less costly speakers. But, it has such an effortless delivery and sounds from it are so immediate that it brings the performer right into the room with you, at least to my ears. And to me that is extremely enjoyable. This audio hobby is about enjoyment, we're not talking about medical equipment or other scientific devices where perfect accuracy means everything. Yes, in the studio, where you're monitoring and mixing recordings, then accuracy is very important. But, you shouldn't look down on and denigrate those who may like a sound that deviates from accuracy if it gives them more enjoyment, because the most inportant thing is having the gear that gives you the most enjoyment and fun when listening to your favorite music, whether that's gear that is neutral and deadly accurate or whether it's gear that isn't. And, we know that measurements don't tell the whole story. Yes, if a speaker has a huge hole in the response somewhere it's going to sound bad, or if it has a tweeter that's 10db louder than the woofer, like many B&Ws, that's going to be unbearable too. But, you can't tell me that there aren't speakers that mesure nearly the same yet sound very different. That's why specs and measurements are only a guide and listening is still the final arbiter. So, let's all just be civil and show other people respect. Don't try to make people feel inferior than you because they don't always agree with you about what sounds good. Respect other people's taste in gear, no matter how much it disagrees with your taste. And when you call out inaccuracies, do it diplomatically and with civility. This is a great community that our gracious host E has provided here for us, and we've developed relationships with one another, and that makes it even more special, and more of a community, and we want to continue to build on that. So, let's respect one another, even when we choose to disagree, ok?
@@DougMen1 you seem to not understand what Im trying to get at here. I do not look down on people's taste on sound, they can like speakers that have, for example, a 20db peak @ 6khz, thats totally fine. Like a titally V shaped sound signature? No problem. Like a flactuating sound signature with huge holes and peaks all across the spectrum? I can accept that. I do not dispute that at all, there is nothing to be disputed because thats personal taste. What I dont agree is, for example again, calling a speaker that has a 20db peak @ 6hz neutral. Any statement that goes against PROVEN DATA is what Im debunking here, not personal taste. Huge difference. Its ok if anyone wants to get married to an elephant, just dont start telling me the elephant is a human when its not. I can be as civilized as when discussing personal taste, but I can be real straight forward when PROVEN DATA is twisted to fit someone's narrative. Lets keep data and personal preference separated, because data is always data but personal preference varies.