advertisement


KEF LS50

How do these compare with Harbeth PSESR?

S.

If my passive LS50s are anything to go by, the Harbeths would have to be mighty fine speakers to be better in the round, even before we start comparing cost. My only complaint about the LS50s is the lack of grille, which is a bit of an oversight; otherwise they are a notably 'grown up', musical speaker that goes quite a bit deeper than its modest size might suggest. I don't sell speakers, so no axe to grind here - I'm just a very happy LS50 user.
 
I have both the Kef ls50 and Harbeth P3ESR

the kef ls50 are more dynamic, more detailed with deeper bass. The P3ESR are warmer, smoother, have better tone. The ls50 image better. The biggest "problem" I hear with the ls50 is exaggerated forwardness/brightness between 2khz-6 khz which gives the ls50 a colder/brighter sound.

the P3ESR are more natural sounding and this is where for me, the P3ESR are in another league vs the ls50 because the instruments/voices on the P3ESR sounds more real, have better tone, perhaps less detailed but a more mature and musical sound. For example, Voices are reproduced with a magic that is slightly lost on the ls50. on the other hand, the ls50 Voices have better pin point accuracy placement in the soundstage.

The ls50 can play much louder then the P3ESR. for movies id probably take the ls50. if you need to play loud, id take the ls50 as the p3esr start sounding compressed quite fast. For jazz, folk, classical, harbeth all the way for me. for pop/electronica, ls50 is a safer choice
 
I have both the Kef ls50 and Harbeth P3ESR

the kef ls50 are faster/more dynamic, with deeper bass. The P3ESR are warmer, smoother, have better tone. The ls50 image (much) better. The ls50, despte having deeper bass, do sound perhaps thin in the midrange vs the P3esr. The biggest "problem" I hear with the ls50 is exagerated forwardness/brigthness between 2khz-6 khz which gives the ls50 are colder/brighter sound.

the P3ESR are more natural sounding and this is where for me, the P3ESR are in another league vs the ls50 because the instruments on the P3ESR sounds more real, have better tone, perhaps less detailed but a more mature and musical sound

The ls50 can play much louder then the P3ESR, perhaps 8 to10 db louder!


The post I was looking for!

Thanks.

S.
 
Slightly surprising description above, since I'd say the P3s are more revealing than LS50s. In a nearfield set up the P3s are much more refined and see-through. In a set up which is meant to pressurize and fill the room, it is a different matter; the LS50s have more weight.

We have discussed this comparison at length in the past, so it would be worth doing a search.
 
Slightly surprising description above, since I'd say the P3s are more revealing than LS50s. In a nearfield set up the P3s are much more refined and see-through. In a set up which is meant to pressurize and fill the room, it is a different matter; the LS50s have more weight.

We have discussed this comparison at length in the past, so it would be worth doing a search.

Link please.

S.
 
Would say from what ive heard of both speakers, the ls50 need a nice bit of power wattage to shine.the p3esr not so much.
 
Slightly surprising description above, since I'd say the P3s are more revealing than LS50s. In a nearfield set up the P3s are much more refined and see-through. In a set up which is meant to pressurize and fill the room, it is a different matter; the LS50s have more weight.

We have discussed this comparison at length in the past, so it would be worth doing a search.

some would argue that ls50 are more detailed. i personally also agree with you in that I find the P3ESR generally more "see-through'' at least musically, but some could argue that transients wise, imaging wise and bass wise, the ls50 is more "see-through". :p

The ls50 and P3ESR measure almost identical at the listening position, but they sound very different. best hear both and decide for oneself.
 
I have both the Kef ls50 and Harbeth P3ESR

the kef ls50 are more dynamic, more detailed with deeper bass. The P3ESR are warmer, smoother, have better tone. The ls50 image better. The biggest "problem" I hear with the ls50 is exaggerated forwardness/brightness between 2khz-6 khz which gives the ls50 a colder/brighter sound.

the P3ESR are more natural sounding and this is where for me, the P3ESR are in another league vs the ls50 because the instruments/voices on the P3ESR sounds more real, have better tone, perhaps less detailed but a more mature and musical sound. For example, Voices are reproduced with a magic that is slightly lost on the ls50. on the other hand, the ls50 Voices have better pin point accuracy placement in the soundstage.

The ls50 can play much louder then the P3ESR. for movies id probably take the ls50. if you need to play loud, id take the ls50 as the p3esr start sounding compressed quite fast. For jazz, folk, classical, harbeth all the way for me. for pop/electronica, ls50 is a safer choice
I've owned both and agree with all of the above - except I wouldn't call the LS50s bright. The main problem I had with them was the speaker/room interaction making them sound too bass-heavy for my tastes. In their favour, I would say their ability to recreate an impression of "acoustic space" surpasses the Harbeths.

I currently have Harbeth P3-ES2s but I now have a Quad pre-amp with good tone controls so I remain curious about the LS50s. Maybe I'll buy a pair and give them another try.

Both speakers are excellent in their own way.
 
I've owned them both and prefer the LS50's. I love the Harbeth's and could live with them long term but I find the LS50's are better on a wider variety of genres. I listen to classical and jazz, primarily, however I occasionally listen to more raucous music and my LS50's can keep up with all of it.
 
I've owned both and agree with all of the above - except I wouldn't call the LS50s bright. The main problem I had with them was the speaker/room interaction making them sound too bass-heavy for my tastes. In their favour, I would say their ability to recreate an impression of "acoustic space" surpasses the Harbeths.

I currently have Harbeth P3-ES2s but I now have a Quad pre-amp with good tone controls so I remain curious about the LS50s. Maybe I'll buy a pair and give them another try.

Both speakers are excellent in their own way.

This is my second go around with the LS50's. Better the second time around. I think I really appreciate their talents more now.
 
I've owned both.

Daft Punk? LS50.

Mozart? P3ESR.

If I had to take one or the other I'd take the P3ESR. After a few years the tweeter on the KEF gets on my nerves a bit. Oh, and that orange driver... it was fun for awhile but I really grew to hate the look of it.

I prefer Proac Tablette 10 to either, but barely. But yes, definitely.
 
I have both the Kef ls50 and Harbeth P3ESR

the kef ls50 are more dynamic, more detailed with deeper bass. The P3ESR are warmer, smoother, have better tone. The ls50 image better. The biggest "problem" I hear with the ls50 is exaggerated forwardness/brightness between 2khz-6 khz which gives the ls50 a colder/brighter sound.

the P3ESR are more natural sounding and this is where for me, the P3ESR are in another league vs the ls50 because the instruments/voices on the P3ESR sounds more real, have better tone, perhaps less detailed but a more mature and musical sound.
For example, Voices are reproduced with a magic that is slightly lost on the ls50. on the other hand, the ls50 Voices have better pin point accuracy placement in the soundstage.

The ls50 can play much louder then the P3ESR. for movies id probably take the ls50. if you need to play loud, id take the ls50 as the p3esr start sounding compressed quite fast. For jazz, folk, classical, harbeth all the way for me. for pop/electronica, ls50 is a safer choice

I have not listened to a lot of speakers but I share the same experience. Most of the speakers I have tried did not sound as natural as the Harbeth. The tone of instruments is usually brighter and more spotlit than the Harbeth, sounding less real. That is the reason I always gravitate to the Harbeth after trying some of these speakers although at times I did contemplate of embarking on a different path. Sometimes I still crave for a more open and dynamic sound (the Proac Tablette 10 Signature is still on my radar) but I'm not sure if the tone would be realistic to ensure a long-term enjoyment. Having said that, I have plans for the Tablette 10 Signature to complement the Harbeth SHL5 Plus that I own in the near future.

FWIW I have listened to the P3ESR several times and it is indeed a very nice speaker. Most of the posts here have been quite accurate. The P3ESR may not be the best in rock and hard-hitting music but the tone or timbre of acoustic instruments sound very real through the speaker. Electric instruments such as electric guitars etc. may sound better through other speakers such as the LS50. Electronic music often sound a bit smooth through the Harbeth.
 
FWIW about 6 or 7 years ago, I listened to both Dali Mentor Menuet and KEF LS50 at the dealers on the same day before I went with the Dali. Both sounded good, but the Dalis look better than the KEF to me and slightly cheaper as well which made the choice easier. I really wanted to consider the Harbeth P3ESR but it made little sense to have two pairs of Harbeth in the house(I already have the larger SHL5s at that time). To be frank, I still regard the P3ESR to be an overall more balanced and polished speaker than both Dali Mentor Menuet or the KEF LS50. That's just my opinion, and preference.
 
I have both the Kef ls50 and Harbeth P3ESR

the kef ls50 are more dynamic, more detailed with deeper bass. The P3ESR are warmer, smoother, have better tone. The ls50 image better. The biggest "problem" I hear with the ls50 is exaggerated forwardness/brightness between 2khz-6 khz which gives the ls50 a colder/brighter sound.

the P3ESR are more natural sounding and this is where for me, the P3ESR are in another league vs the ls50 because the instruments/voices on the P3ESR sounds more real, have better tone, perhaps less detailed but a more mature and musical sound. For example, Voices are reproduced with a magic that is slightly lost on the ls50. on the other hand, the ls50 Voices have better pin point accuracy placement in the soundstage.

The ls50 can play much louder then the P3ESR. for movies id probably take the ls50. if you need to play loud, id take the ls50 as the p3esr start sounding compressed quite fast. For jazz, folk, classical, harbeth all the way for me. for pop/electronica, ls50 is a safer choice

Could you tell us how you've got the Kefs setup? E.g. Drivers at, above, below ear height... are you listening on or off axis? Distance of Kefs from front/side walls? Only asking as I shared some of your views on the Kefs forwardness and I overcame this with speaker positioning. Made a significant difference in fact (eg. 70cm from nearest walls, drivers about 3 inches below ear height, and I listen off axis).
 
Could you tell us how you've got the Kefs setup? E.g. Drivers at, above, below ear height... are you listening on or off axis? Distance of Kefs from front/side walls? Only asking as I shared some of your views on the Kefs forwardness and I overcame this with speaker positioning. Made a significant difference in fact (eg. 70cm from nearest walls, drivers about 3 inches below ear height, and I listen off axis).

yes, I agree. with positioning the kef with no toe-in at all, im able to remove some of that 2khz to 6khz bump/harshness

i also agree that the LS50 shows more of the acoustic space and image quite a bit better then the Harbeth
 


advertisement


Back
Top