advertisement


KEF Reference 104/2

I

istari_knight

pfm Member
I currently use a pair of Reference 103/4 with the matching Kube 200 EQ... It sounds good but I'm always open to the idea of upgrading :cool:

Seen a pair of 104/2's locally at what appears to be a good price but having never heard a pair I wonder if they would be an upgrade or sidegrade ? Possible issues are degraded foam surrounds, dried up ferrofluid in the tweeters, dried up electrolyte in the crossover capacitors & I've read they must be used with their specific Kube EQ - I can sort pretty much all of that but is there any truth in that last bit ?

Comments from previous owners / listeners very welcome as to whether or not they are worth the effort in 2014.
 
I am sure I auditioned the older version without a Kube, and it sounded OK, but I didn't buy - I ended up with EPOS.

They use a bandpass loaded bass section, which is not for everybody or every room.

They are a four ohm load, so some amps will be unhappy; many solid state designs will be fine.
 
Thanks PD. I think my current 103/4's use a similar bandpass loaded bass section but are complimented by a "Uni-Q" mid/hf driver as opposed to the 3 separate drive units in the 104/2.

I suppose without a forum consensus I'll have to make a decision the old fashioned way.... Go & have a listen for myself.
 
They can sound terrific, but need a bit of space around them and demand an amp that is fairly load tolerant - the impedance is a flat four ohms right across the range as a result of kef's 'conjugate match' crossover design. The Kube isn't required - and I don't think it really helps the time I've heard it in action, not least because it demands rather a lot of amp power to only extend the bass output half an octave or so. (The bandpass bass loading rolls-off approaching 30dB/oct below c.45Hz)

My view - 104/2s are a bit of a no-brainer to try at the low prices they go for.
 
Thanks for that Martin, good to know the Kube isn't essential at all.

I've got an old DIY Nap140 clone which is happy driving 4ohm loads all day long due to my massive overkill heatsinking ;)
 
I ran a pair for several years on the end of a Naim 180 without any problems...no Kube either. Room positioning can be a bit of a challenge as already mentioned, but get it right and they are a very good speaker.
 
104/2 Refs are superb. I ran some for 10 years with a Quad 405-2, Naim 140 and 250.

The Kube doesn't add anything much. A bit of bass with classical but, IME it 'slows' rock and jazz up a tad.

Our 104/2s were trashed in leak of water in the house. We had to hunt for 2 years to find anything to compare with them and ended up with Obelisks.

If you have the space they're wonderful.
 
Thanks for the added info guys, much appreciated... They're certainly fondly remembered that for sure.

I've just picked up a pair of Cambridge Audio R50's so if I manage to get the 104/2 as well fun will be had comparing them... Apple's & oranges I should think !
 
I would say the 104/2s are a good bet.
I really enjoyed the pair I had, if not for the slightly generous bass output which created a few issues in my room at the time.

They are actually a very easy load for an amplifier as long as its happy with a 4 Ohm resistive load, which most should, and especially Valve amps actually if they have a 4Ohm Output tap on the Transformers.

I used mine with a modest Puresound A10, and with the 104/2s decent sensitivity of around 92dB/2m/1w and the ~10wpc of the A10 (4ohm output transformers) they went really well together, only found an improvement with a 130wpc Restek Challenger with very high volumes and dynamics at that level.

As mentioned as well, the bass drivers will need re-foaming, IIRC some of the early single wired ones had rubber outer surrounds on the bass driver but the inner foam rings on all of them WILL need doing by now. Some say it wont make a difference, with regards to the inner foam rings but it does.
I did mine (inner surrounds as the outer were rubber on my pair) and its an easy DIY job if you don't mind being a little OCD when cleaning the drivers of foam residue and taking your time, the kits are only around £50 all in IIRC.

The ferrofluid will also need cleaning off/re-applying on the tweeter, there is also a new replacement via Falcon Acoustics IIRC.
Fortunately the B110 mid-range drivers should be fine, no issues there apart from sometimes you see the dust caps dented in.

There are lots of tweaks like making sure the coupling bar is tightened up and the access panels are air tight with new gasket and correctly tightened up screws.

Oh and they are surprisingly heavy, even the small mid-range/treble enclosure that is bolted on, weighs around 10kg+ on its own!

Id say go for it if the drivers are in good condition, say around £400 up to around £600 if they are the nice Raymond Cooke SE version. I would not want to pay more than £200 if there is the hint of the driver foams not being 100%.

Kef Reference 104/2 by RSdesignUK, on Flickr
 
I really like my 103/4's and my ref. 2's. Regardless of what the brochure says both need a power amplifier with a very stiff power supply. An NVA A60 died at moderate levels (overheating, and yes I did use NVA cables) and it made my Exposure IV sound very slow and lifeless (just after a full re-cap). They really sing on my HackerNAPs. I'm going the active DIY route to try and better them. The ref. 2's are a step up in terms of midrange and treble separation but a little slower in the bass as the internal driver enclosures are vented in the 2's and sealed in the 103/4's. If the 104/2's need re-foaming I believe a kit is around £50, not hard, just a few hours work.
 
I had some model 1's and they were truly excellent, but I found the Kube significantly muddied up the sound and pretty soon discarded it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top