advertisement


Breaking-in KEF R3 Metas

R

regavegas

pfm Member
Hi group,
This is for anyone who owns R3 Metas; anyone else is welcome to chime in, too.

I just bought a pair and am breaking them in as we speak; they have, maybe, 20 hours on them so far. One thing I've noticed is the highs, on some recordings, seem a bit reserved; I'm not getting the cymbal decay or other high-end detail I've heard on some of my other speakers.

Which gets to my question about break-in: did you find the top end opened up as these speakers broke-in? How long was your break-in period?

Vocals and midrange sound great. Bass is good too, which is complimented by a pair of subs.

Thanks in advance for your insights.
-Jeff
 
regavegas said:
Hi group,
This is for anyone who owns R3 Metas; anyone else is welcome to chime in, too.

I just bought a pair and am breaking them in as we speak; they have, maybe, 20 hours on them so far. One thing I've noticed is the highs, on some recordings, seem a bit reserved; I'm not getting the cymbal decay or other high-end detail I've heard on some of my other speakers.

Which gets to my question about break-in: did you find the top end opened up as these speakers broke-in? How long was your break-in period?

Vocals and midrange sound great. Bass is good too, which is complimented by a pair of subs.

Thanks in advance for your insights.
-Jeff
Click to expand...

Kef's tweeter is quite 'unforceful' sounding and the speakers have a narrow directivity in from the mid-mids upwards.
Are your R3s pointing towards the listening spot?
 
I am using a pair of Bel Canto REF600 monos. The speakers are pointed at my listening spot, but are slightly off axis.
 
regavegas said:
I am using a pair of Bel Canto REF600 monos. The speakers are pointed at my listening spot, but are slightly off axis.
Click to expand...

This tweeter has a very 'smooth/effortless' sound. If you don't like it after one week it might make sense to get other speakers.
Also the narrow directivity means less sound reflfecting from side walls and the result is a less treble-y balance.
 
canyelles said:
KEF claim that their META technology reduces treble distortion.
It's possible that is what you are not hearing.
Click to expand...

That is what I meant 'smooth/effortless' sound.
On top of that there's the flat response at the top (as opposed to most speakers which seem to produce a rise on the top octaves) and also the smooth narrowing directivity (as opposed to typical un-waveguided tweeters which splash a lot of treble into the room at the bottom of the passband) which results in an in-room response with a bigger downward tilt from the mid-mids upwards.
 
Last edited:
I bought a pair of end-of-line R3s when the Metas were released. Did not notice any break-in changes, but I also wasn't listening for any.

I have the rear bungs removed, Chord clearway cables, wave guide at ear height and about 1m from rear wall, am still tweaking the toe-in. They are surprisingly good when pointed straight ahead but stereo imagery improves when toed in ever so slightly.

I'm thinking mine are bass shy but they are not on stands and I don't have subs. What volume are you listening at?
 
The R3 Metas are great speakers. I wouldn't expect the treble to change too much, if at all. I certainly wouldn't call them rolled off or dark in the highs, but rather clean, open and distortion free. The openness throughout the mids and highs gives real presence in the room, without brightness.

It could be that you just prefer more forward, brighter sounding speakers.
 
epo1 said:
I bought a pair of end-of-line R3s when the Metas were released. Did not notice any break-in changes, but I also wasn't listening for any.

I have the rear bungs removed, Chord clearway cables, wave guide at ear height and about 1m from rear wall, am still tweaking the toe-in. They are surprisingly good when pointed straight ahead but stereo imagery improves when toed in ever so slightly.

I'm thinking mine are bass shy but they are not on stands and I don't have subs. What volume are you listening at?
Click to expand...
My listening room is larger, but somewhat "irregular" - one wall has a window, the other opens up into my living room. It's why I have my speakers set up on the KEF stands for near-field listening. My listening level is in the 60 to mid 70 db range. The speakers are 7ft apart, with my listening spot about 7 feet away. I'm using a pair of subs, which really helps.
 
tuga said:
Which speakers are those?
Click to expand...
I downsized my system after a recent move. I had been using Vienna Acoustics Beethoven Baby Grand floorstanders, which were nice speakers. I needed to get something smaller and the KEF were well-reviewed online. It's very possible I'm simply used to a more detailed presentation. I'll give the KEFs more time. Luckily, I have a 60 day return window to make a decision.
 
Goat said:
The R3 Metas are great speakers. I wouldn't expect the treble to change too much, if at all. I certainly wouldn't call them rolled off or dark in the highs, but rather clean, open and distortion free. The openness throughout the mids and highs gives real presence in the room, without brightness.

It could be that you just prefer more forward, brighter sounding speakers.
Click to expand...
That's entirely possible. My previous speakers were Vienna Acoustics floorstanders, which had lots of detail. (Unfortunately, I needed to downsize my system.) At any rate, I'm giving the KEFs some time to break-in. I may also experiment with other speaker cables. I'm currently using Kimber Monocle XL's.
 
regavegas said:
I downsized my system after a recent move. I had been using Vienna Acoustics Beethoven Baby Grand floorstanders, which were nice speakers. I needed to get something smaller and the KEF were well-reviewed online. It's very possible I'm simply used to a more detailed presentation. I'll give the KEFs more time. Luckily, I have a 60 day return window to make a decision.
Click to expand...
I've looked at measurements online and the Baby Grand has exaggerated treble as well as a resonance in the presence region and a directivitity mismatch at the mid-tweeter corssover.
It is likely that it sounds more 'detailed' but what you were listening to was the distortion and the changes to response (the perceived detail was fake).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top