Are the KEF Blade/Blade 2 Metas a Significant Upgrade from Blade?

What I notice when we get to the $25k speakers is how smooth the mids and treble are. Good, affordable speakers will squawk or chirp with hard recordings and the early uniq speakers could be ruthless. The Blade uniq is already as smooth as any out there and is unique to the model. Comparing the ls50 to the ls50 meta isn't indicative to the blade to blade meta as the blade uniq was already addressing the backwave to a level none of the other non meta speakers did. 

blade uniq was already addressing the backwave to a level none of the other non meta speakers did.

Can you reference more info on this statement. My understanding is that the old Blade uniQ is slightly compromised in relation to the uniQ in the old Reference line so as to fit the enclosure.

Audiotroy also posted some info about the Blade driver having some upgraded part compared to the LS50 non-Meta  but nothing related to back wave elimination.

Most companies that address the back wave use something elaborate such as the tube in the Yamaha NS5000, the tapered tubes in the Vivid lineup. I believe the Meta is Kef’s first real push into this area.

A comparison of KEF LS60 and pair of KC62s with Blade 2 Meta would be interesting. Wonder how close you get with an MSRP of $10K ($7K for LS60, $3K for KC62s). I’m using a pair of KC62s with LS50 Wireless II in my living room.  The SW controlled DSP KEF provides for the wireless speakers does an excellent job of integrating the speakers with the subs.

db

The uniq driver in the blades uses a vented magnet, I believe it’s the 10th gen uniq with the custom tweeter. Each line of kefs use a different uniq with the blade and blade 2 being unique to even the reference, now the ref and blade meta use the same uniq driver, while the R uses another unit and the q line different still.

KEF’s vented tweeters were suppose to address the same issue as Meta, back wave management; I guess not quite as effectively. A friend asked me whether he should purchase a Ref 3 Meta or used Blade 2. I told him he should try to listen to both but I’d favor an excellent condition used Blade 2.  

I spoke with a KEF Blade and KRELL amp dealer today on the East Coast.  The dealer loves the KEF Blade and knows it very well. We had a superb conversation about amps for the Blades. One of the most knowledgeable dealers I have ever spoken with. 

He said that in his experience the Blade Meta is a bit more detailed, a bit faster sounding, and tighter bass than the older Blade.  However, he has an older Blade that they have in the shop and he wants to keep that for himself. He said that the changes on the old Blade to new Blade Meta are not that big. He did say the changes from old LS50 to the new LS50 Meta are much bigger sonically. 

In terms, of amps he loves the new KRELL XD amps on them. the DUO 300XD  model and up (unfortunately I have the lower power DUO 175XD). He also said the CODA #16 is great with the Blade (does not sell CODA). 

Finally got the time to get the new display in my meridian’s, the dsp8k with the se upgrade is pretty special. I’ve been going back and forth with the blades. I love these first world problems. Can’t keep both so it’ll depend on the market and which I can sell, they’re both amazing 

yyzsantabarbara:

I think both the Krell and Coda are great choices for KEF Reference and Blade models. I love my Coda 16.0/ Blade 2 setup.  I find it interesting that the dealer would not sell the original Blade at a discount and order a Blade Meta for himself.(Considering dealer cost is usually 50-55% MSRP on loudspeakers). Perhaps there was some attribute of the original Blade that appealed to him. 

@audiobrian He did say that he sometimes likes the old Blade more. I forgot the reason for that but I do know that the changes in the new Blade are right up my alley. Not that I have an issue with the old Blade.

The dealer confirmed to me that my KRELL DUO 175XD is really not powerful enough for the Blade. As did the old COO of KRELL. So I am putting up my 175XD up for sale tonight. 

I wouldn't count out the Krell without trying it. I think the Michi would be sonically inferior to your Krell and the blades are surprisingly efficient, specifically with most full range speakers if my amp isn't strong enough I hear it as a lack of balance in the bass, not so with the blades. 

I liked the Kef Reference 5 Meta better than the Kef Blade 2 Meta

@rick2000 What was the difference for you? I have heard both myself (prior to Meta).

@yyzsantabarbara  The Kef Reference 5 Meta's had a bigger soundstage and were more musical engaging than the Kef Blade 2 Meta's 

That's interesting and probably room/setup dependent even according to kefs own data.

For kef blade owners that bought new I have to wonder if the loss selling the previous blade to step up to the meta's is as obvious as spending an additional $15k on an amp/pre combo?

BUMP, After having a life evaluating health event I decided to spend some money on my system. I did have a buyer for my Blade 1 speakers, but realized there was nothing else out there I wanted to replace them with. I decided to try the Blades with a pair of Mac Mc611's and a c49 pre. I can't believe the difference at low volume the change made!  I had no idea how much detail, dynamics, resolution, tone and layers of resolution...Can you tell I'm excited? IDK what I was expecting other than the pretty blue meters and I wonder if the Blades have even more potential? I wouldn't consider an upgrade to the meta without trying a step up in components first. The bass I can feel at a half a watt wasn't there with any speaker before. Did I get lucky or can a guy win a hand if he stays in the game long enough? idk, but it really SLAMS home the need for component matching regardless of reputation.