LS50 Wireless fail, or is old gear that good?


After ready so much positive info on the LS50W, I gave them a try but was massively disappointed compared to my (much) older gear.
I set up the LS50's via Ethernet and WiFi playing HiRes files from NAS and Tidal via Roon, then compared the same tracks via WiFi to Roon on an iPhone>Dragonfly Red>ARC SP9 (1987)>Threshold amp (1980's)>Martin Logan Aerius i (1999). Wasn't even close.
Especially on female vocals, the sense of realism, timbre, air, etc was notably superior on the old system. I played around with the KEF DSP, room placement and even switched rooms.I really wanted the KEF's to work, but no luck.

So, am I missing something with the LS50W, or is the old stuff just that good?

128x128tcbrinkley
Another agoner brought a pair of ls50s over to my house to hear. In larger room off high power but less damped SS amp we both agreed the sound was not good at all. Muddled and no bass. In smaller 12x12 room with vaulted ceiling and a different high power more highly damped amp, voila, very nice all around, a winner.

So like most smaller speakers I think they are not well suited to larger rooms. A sub or two would likely fix that. Also I think you want 100w/ch or more and high current capability for best results. Amps that double power specs from 8 to 4’ohms should do well.
It has nothing to do with old vs. new. You are comparing two completely different type speakers. The ML is a large ESL with a 8 inch woofer and the KEF is a tiny powered 2 way with a 5 inch woofer. Besides the speakers I don't think the amps in the KEF would come close to the Threshold!
You make a good point about the difference in speakers. I also tried a pair of Thiel 1.6's in place of the ML's with basically same result. I'm a source first guy, so figured the iPhone as a source for the old gear would level the playing field. And yes, the Threshold is a beast!

It's probably a new thread, but I wonder how the old ARC>Threshold>ML's would compare with similar modern counterparts. Surely the new stuff is better, but by how much?
I’ve been doing a bunch of listening this past week to both passive and active LS50’s.

The passives need a bunch of power in my oppinion.  200 watts @ 8 ohms and 400 watts at 4 ohms starts to wake them up!  I have mine paired to a Rel T9i subwoofer, a little topping t60 amp, dragonfly red dac, tidal on pc  as the source.  The speakers are still new, maybe 15 hours of listening, but they sound really good.  Very transparent and detailed.  My listening room is 11x14x8 and is treated. The system sounds surprisingly good although it doesn’t play super loud and the Ls50’s don’t have a ton of bass with a little 50 watt amp, but the Rel makes up for that :)

Anyhow, the Passive Ls50’s sound great in my application and I’m loving them!

A friend of mine went with the Active Ls50’s and set up properly, they are amazing!  They (Active Ls50’s) don’t seem to care what signal you are feeding them; they always sound pretty dang good.  The imaging, timing and coherance are like nothing I’ve heard.  I can’t figure out why the Active Ls50’s have this magic to them; initially I thought it was the dac but maybe it has more to do with the dsp?

Regardless, the Active LS50’s fill his large space quite well.  I hooked up my Rel T9i to his Active Ls50’s and it was stupid good.

I would agree that the sounstage is more on the pin point side and not the enveloping side (although the Active LS50’s have incredibly holographic imaging). They don’t have the extension and air to them that some speakers have but for the money I paid, I’m pretty happy with the way they sound!