You are correct! KEF needed something they could claim was "special" to distinguish their small box from all the other small boxes - some of which were cheaper and sounded excellent!
KEF's meta material gimmick?
Hi,
A thought just occured to me recently. Is KEF's Meta material just a genius marketing gimmick? I mean everyone and their grandmas reviewed the KEF LS50 Meta and they spent way too much time explaining the purpose of the meta material. I know white papers were published with conclusive results. KEF is beloved by the "measurements first" crowd so nobody bats an eye. The illustrations for the Meta material portray an intricate maze made of a some kind of gel. But isn't that just $1 piece of molded rubber? It's just a coaster relax.
I wanna bet real money that the 365+ cork coasters from IKEA ($2.50 for 2) would accomplish the exact same thing. Cork is a great sound absorbing material. It's complex. Just glue that at the back of the driver. Mission accomplished? Am I missing something?
The LS50 Meta is much better than the older LS50 non-Meta. A serious improvement in my system. So much so that I cancelled plans to buy another monitor that cost 6X more. The LS50 Meta and a KEF KC62 sub are my all-done speakers for my small office. The better the upstream equipment the better the sound. Why not glue the cork and post your impressions. Maybe you have discovered a new way to design speakers.
|
@yyzsantabarbara I have transmission line speakers. I want that back wave. It amplifies the bass. I listened to the LS50 Meta Wireless in a shop and they were really good! They definitely have a more "Hi-Fi" sound than my Closer Acoustics OGY. But I think the OGY just sound more natural and less try-hard. I would be happy with either. |
I think there are tens of thousands of terms used by speaker makers to assure the buyer that they are buying the most modern technology possible. The term I saw Focal use was "perception of modernity" I believe. Is any speaker in 2023 much better than any speaker in 2000? Meh. As the Kef videos show however, they are tackling a real problem in a new way, which is the backwave from a tweeter. B&W did it with a tube, others with absorbent stuffing and unique sound chambers (ScanSpeak AirCirc for instance). So, yeah, but what’s the problem? Speaker makers always hype something. Why pick on KEF in particular here? If you really wanted to complain about KEF it's their impedance curves. 🤣 |
Meta sounds like Aerogel.
|
My Revival Audio Atalante 3 speakers use a form of sound deadening behind the dome of its tweeter that does what KEF uses, albeit in a different manner. They call it ARID and It absorbs about 95% of the rearward sound from the tweeter, practically eliminating any standing waves behind it. Straight out of the box, it's some of the cleanest, clearest sound I've heard. Does everyone think everything's been invented that can be invented? All the best, |
Post removed |
A lot of new technology in speakers since 2000 and a Renaissance of an old technology from the 70’s making a huge comeback. I like the newer Diamond tweeters, even some of the beryllium tweeters. |
I just finished listening to Hania Rana's ESJA CD. What I thought was a poor recording with constant soft, scratching, nick like sounds turned out to be the angle she was playing the keys with on the first two tracks (a guess on my part) They varied in speed and were not always distinctly heard. It could even have been something she wore that kept making contact with something. The more I listened, the easier it was to hear every movement she made, foot peddle pressure, leg moving in sync, music sheets being turned, even the seat ever so slightly creaking as she moved around on it (she plays on three different keyboard instruments while centrally situated). All of this is (I'm assuming) made possible by the clarity of the tweeter with that ARID device lurking just behind the tweeter's dome. If you shine a bright light near it, you can just make out the nautilus shaped vanes of the device. Amazing sound. All the best, |
I haven’t heard the Reference 5 Meta’s yet, but There’s more going on in the new KEF Meta’s than them adding the rat maze. The spec’s are different. They are slightly less efficient and the crossover points are different. My Reference 5’s are 90dbs and the crossover for the tweeters are at 2500 hz. The Meta’s are 88db and the tweeters crossover at 2100 hz. |
Of course, dipole loudspeakers avoid the issue of the back wave of a tweeter (and woofer) by not having an enclosure at all. But then you have to deal with the back wave’s interaction with the wall behind the loudspeaker (not to mention the challenge of the lack of an enclosure, with all the benefits they afford). Pick yer poison! |
@yyzsantabarbara that sounds super resolving…but is it clinical sounding like a studio monitor? My worry would be fatigue, especially on recordings that aren’t very good.
|
I would ask, how is meta absorption better than using insulation type material behind tweeter? What do the Revel Salons and other engineering first reference speakers do to deal with tweeter backwave? Comparing LS50 Meta to non-Meta, the frequency response is a little different so it looks like a crossover update is going to account for at least some if not all of the differences.
|
@seanheis1 I get fatigue very easily. The current office system is totally fatigue free. I do not really listen to many bad recordings though I listen for a about 12+ hours a day. I work a lot these days in the office. I do have a warmer CODA#16 amp sitting idle in my office. I flip it back and forth with the AHB2's. Though I seem to prefer the AHB2 in this system more. The AHB2 has great speaker cable while the CODA uses lower end. I cannot use the good cable on the CODA, so that has to play some role in my preferences.
|
@seanheis1 I think we’re on the same page. The “clinical” sound of the LS50 is very desirable actually. I can’t fault it. This is what people expect from KEF. The modern industrial design gives it away. The LS50 delivers the goods. if that’s not your cup of tea then the OGY cost just a hair more. They’re not necessarily “gooder” but noticeably different. |
It is possible for manufactutrers to reduce distortion and breakup through the use of different cone materials. In the case of KEF Meta they put a maze shaped pad behind the tweeter to reduce back wave reflection. Car audio guys do the same thing on door mounted woofers to reduce the magnitude of the back wave. Probably does some good but likely subtle. The biggest change for the Meta series is the smoother, tapered frequency response. Voicing changes through crossover tweaks. Made a big difference. The new series do seem to minimize brightness and metallic overtones, possibly at the expense of detail from what I have heard during demos. Is there embelishment in the Meta marketing? You bet there is. |
I have the original LS-50s and have heard the Metas. There is a small but distinct improvement in the high end without doubt. More amazing to me is KEF keeping the same pricing. All that said, the LS-50 is one of the most frequently mis-used speakers on the market. It is a nearfield monitor, and in smaller treated rooms is capable of extraordinary performance. In medium and large rooms, my own living room as an example, they simply sounded lost. In my office, they sound extraordinary. Is Meta material market hype? No and yes No, it actually works- as claimed. Was that leveraged by KEF's Marketing Department? Yes. That's their job description - to drive demand for their product. And in their case, they can back it up, something not all audio companies, large or small, can claim.. |
@panzrwagn I agree 100% on the small room setup, like my office. Especially with the matching KC62 sub. However, for me the improvements over the old LS50 were huge. The Meta is a much cleaner sounding speaker that just disappears. Now I have my best gear on them, so I do know that makes a difference. |
I wouldn’t be surprised to find out meta material is cheaper and easier to implement than the previous solution. I think the reason ls50 owners hear a bigger difference than blade owners is because the previous ls50 didn’t address the tweeter backwave, correct me if I’m wrong but the blades used a different uniq that used a vented magnet, but my memory is thin here. Each line kef produces at a different price point thus different drivers. |