advertisement


KEF 103.2

I seem to remember distance from side walls being key, I was lucky to be able to give them more than a metre either side, and I had them a good 50cm from the rear wall too. Sounded great.

I bet the 303 is a bit special with them.
 
Good tips, thanks, I'll have a play around with positioning this evening. Distance from side walls not a problem, distance from rear possibly slightly less easy but not insurmountable :)

I have to say that I'm already finding these quite exciting insofar as they seem such fabulous vfm!
 
interesting - these get excellent reviews. Has anyone heard and compared them to modern standmounts that seem to have a similar design philosophy, e.g., Harbeth? (Similar, not necessarily in terms of construction, but in terms of producing a balanced speaker without an artificially tailored frequency curve.)

I almost bought a pair of these in the '80s on the strength of a Gramophone magazine review. I remember the hifi dealer being critical of them and saying they were 'boring'. I now know that 'boring' is code for 'accurate' and 'without artifice'.
 
Last edited:
I had two pairs of them as well as many of the Harbeths. They are definitely of a piece with the BBC-type design philosophy. It is a very see-through presentation, but never tiring. However, the Harbeths have an emotional quality that I missed in the KEFs. Maybe this is just down to box colouration, the KEFs feel to be of a much more solid construction. In the end I felt the KEFs just never made me want to get up and dance, so maybe that Gramophone reviewer was right. However, given what they cost S/H compared to Harbs, they are still a huge bargain for the SQ on offer. Try a pair!
 
eastone said:
I had two pairs of them as well as many of the Harbeths. They are definitely of a piece with the BBC-type design philosophy. It is a very see-through presentation, but never tiring. However, the Harbeths have an emotional quality that I missed in the KEFs. Maybe this is just down to box colouration, the KEFs feel to be of a much more solid construction. In the end I felt the KEFs just never made me want to get up and dance, so maybe that Gramophone reviewer was right. However, given what they cost S/H compared to Harbs, they are still a huge bargain for the SQ on offer. Try a pair!
Click to expand...

I've got a pair of Harbeth M30.1s, so I'll refrain from swapping them for a pair of 103.2s for the time being!
 
I recall these caused controversy back in the day because they used compliant rubber to decouple the woofer from the cabinet.
This was done do reduce cabinet colouration but many, particularly those press and industry voices gravitating around the Linn audio philosophy, claimed that allowing the driver basket this degree of movement adversely impacted dynamics.
I can see the argument in this case. I've no idea if KEF revised the compliant mounting but users might wish to try a more traditional thin compressed gasket and firm mounting for comparison.
 
Robert said:
I recall these caused controversy back in the day because they used compliant rubber to decouple the woofer from the cabinet.
This was done do reduce cabinet colouration but many, particularly those press and industry voices gravitating around the Linn audio philosophy, claimed that allowing the driver basket this degree of movement adversely impacted dynamics.
I can see the argument in this case. I've no idea if KEF revised the compliant mounting but users might wish to try a more traditional thin compressed gasket and firm mounting for comparison.
Click to expand...

I could try that at some point. I'll remove one at the weekend and have a look to see if the gasket is rubber or not.

They do sound ace though, and make an interesting comparison to the other speakers I have here (Eatons and ls3/5a). As a 2nd hand buy they utterly smash the 'bang for the buck' award, and also take the 'best veneer' award :D.
 
Robert said:
...but many, particularly those press and industry voices gravitating around the Linn audio philosophy, claimed that allowing the driver basket this degree of movement adversely impacted dynamics.
Click to expand...

Thankfully the 'Linn Audio Philosophy' is no longer regarded as the only true path to audio Nirvana.
 
Nic Robinson said:
I've been using 103.2s in the main system for a few years now, after finding a pair on ebay and paying £50 if I remember correctly. The only thing they needed was the crap connectors replacing wit proper posts (an easy reverse if necessary) and a good clean up.

I would never part with them now and they have seen off Kans, Kabers, ES14s, SP1s and more. They just do everything amazingly well to my ears.

They seem to like my NCC200 dual mono.
Click to expand...

Hi Nic,

How did you replace the connectors on these? Mine are a very early pair with the weird jaw connectors and the springs are going on them, so the cables are at risk of being pulled put by little hands.

It looks as though one would have to make up and drill a custom mounting plate. Is this what you did?

Cheers
 
foxwelljsly said:
Hi Nic,

How did you replace the connectors on these? Mine are a very early pair with the weird jaw connectors and the springs are going on them, so the cables are at risk of being pulled put by little hands.

It looks as though one would have to make up and drill a custom mounting plate. Is this what you did?

Cheers
Click to expand...
Hi there,

Yes. I got some thin wood and used that in place of the plates already on there, adding the connectors. Then just painted them with some coloured varnish. Seems to do the trick.
B1534416-1101-4136-8F04-E31CC790AFE9_1_105_c
 
Last edited:
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
I vaguely recall someone deciding to remove the compliant mounting from 103.2's and go for "Linn tight" etc and reporting that it ruined the sound FWIW...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top