You need to realize that what you are hearing is diametrically opposed to what the whole world says about those speakers! The DO NOT sound like that unless you are feeding CRAP to them.

Your problem is what is driving them!

Parasound electronics sound like that, with a few very expensive exceptions. I have auditioned some Parasound gear and thought it sounded awful. The P5 and A23 were especially bad. A $500 NAD C325 amp I have sounds way way better.

As long as you have that P5 you will hear crap.

A good integrated amplifier from Arcam, Musical Fidelity, or Creek will make your speakers sound 300% better. That is the way to go!

Or you could maybe get decent sound with that power amp IF you dump that crummy preamp. Vincent makes a good preamp that is not too expensive. The Audio Research LS17 is also excellent.

Garbage in....garbage out.

Keep those speakers!

Everything else in your system is junk compared to those speakers. You have Class A speakers and everything else is Class D or worse; a horrible dis-service to those fine speakers!

Garbage in....garbage out.

P.S.- The Musical Fidelity M3I is one amp that really sounds good with those speakers. I heard that combo at my other home recently. A friend bought those speakers and brought them over.

I use the Musical Fidelity M6PRX power amplifier with the Audio Research LS-26 preamp for my system now, but i have an M3i to sell from my other house which is for sale.

It is like new, cost $1500, and you could have it for $900.

Send PM if you want it. It WILL put a smile on your face with those excellent speakers.

P.P.S.- An OPPO BDP-103 will sound 300% better than that Rotel, too (with direct ANALOG connections to your preamp or amp, to get rid of all those unwanted and redundant  DACs). Actually, running direct ANALOG connections from the Rotel to the preamp might help some. The way you are connecting it now strikes me as a very bad idea.

I would suggest that you keep the speakers. There are not a lot of floorstanders that don't need a subwoofer anyway, although the KEF Q900 IS one that has a ton of low bass and would not.

There are several good amps made by Arcam, Creek, and Musical Fidelity, among others. I just threw mine in there because I KNOW it is very good and it would save you money compared to a new one; no big deal.

I use the NHT B12D sub and recommend it highly. I bought it to use with some PSB Image T6 speakers, and it worked well with those. I now have Vandersteen Treo speakers, which have so much bass of their own that I only use the subwoofer for music with huge kettledrums or pipe organs. I don't use it a lot.

Most reviewers at Stereophile have condemned the poor quality of Toslink, so you might want to heed that and consider alternatives. I have no personal experience with it. I have always used coaxial connections for digital signals.

I will reiterate that I think the harshness and negative sound quality you are hearing is IMO coming from the P5 preamp, but the only way to prove that to your satisfaction would be to get a better preamp or integrated in there and see what you hear.

Cables can also throw off the balance of a system. What cables are you using? When a speaker is revealing what happens before the speakers is important. Your components may be fine but they may not compliment each other. Synergy is important among components and speakers. I have a Krell S-300i that sounds best with my Focal speakers. I also own Monitor Audio RS6's which did not suit my ears. Keep the speakers and work toward system synergy. 

As far as interconnect cables go, I have found that sometimes the connection between unit A and unit B sound just as good with some $10 cables as some $1000 cables; totaly non-critical.

But then the connection between unit A and unit C will sound totally different with 4 different cables. Very critical.

Fom what it's worth, i have had the best results, in general, with Audioquest cables; especially the Diamondback and Copperhead cables.

Several Monster cables I have tried sounded like crap; worse than the generic cables that come free with equipment.

That's just one pilgim's limited experience, for what it is worth.

like others, i am puzzled by the fact you hear any harshness out of the LS50. it is *not* the character of the speakers at all. it is doubly strange because i think you have a pretty well-put together system.

i paired them with a Velodyne Minivee, but honestly i keep the Velodyne at 5% so it doesn't intrude with the absolutely pristine music that flows out of the LS50s. my LS50 stand about 2 feet from the back wall, so bass is plenty, and clean to boot. i guess it depends on your music choice and whether you often listen to a giant kodo drum recording at real-life volume levels. :-) i pair my LS50 with a Creek Destiny poweramp these days, and a Benchmark DAC2 HGC provides DA and preamp duties. i get a sound out of this combo i think i shall be happy with forever, but i am curious about the new Benchmark power amp. i am not going to claim it's a system that murders systems 4 times the price (though it sure does the one i used to own, which i mostly credit the LS50 with), but it is a very sweet mix of accuracy and yet musical enough to not be either tiring  or distracting from the overall performance. i listen to mostly jazz and classical (that i like to FLAC) and R&B (and for that MP3s are perfectly fine, anyone that claims a 1960/70s motown album sounds better as a FLAC was dropped from a second floor as a baby :-D).

as to cabling, i stick with AnalysisPlus, i think the balanced cables from preamp to power amp are $300 and the loudspeaker cables about $700. good cables but nothing esoteric, because differences -to me- are minute. my only issue with cheap cables is they may introduce EMI with poor shielding and/or contacts. i'd rather spend some extra to make sure i get clean, transparent, shielded interconnects between components. so as long as cabling is decent i think it's the last thing one should go after for enhancing sound.

power filtering is important. i have an expensive power brick in storage, but I seem to get very clean power where i am now - so a simple Furman Power Station seems to do the trick. i do upgrade power cables to $70 or so for the same reason i do with other cables - shielding. simple stuff.

because i don't think any of your compoenents or cabling could be causing your issues (Because they shouldn't and seem like they ought to play nice together), i'd simply urge you to simply wait and see if the new sound grows on you. i am not sure what speakers you had prior, but maybe you simply need to get used to a more revealing and accurate speaker. make no mistake: the LS50 is a keeper, unless you have a *really* large listening room.

other than that, i'd check out the power quality; and then would look into the pre-amp and amp.

Since MP3 throws out part of the music when it compresses why bother with it? Why not use FLAC for any music that you rip to "whatever" medium. I've ripped 1500+ CD's to a 500GB USB HDD, all in FLAC format for use with a Netbook and USB DAC as part of my portable DJ system This includes a whole slew of Motown and other LP's that aren't "audiophile" quality. Storage space is so cheap that IMO it doesn't make sense to throw away any of the music.

My Sandisk ClipZip is a different situation because I'm not trying to carry an entire music collection with me. I only have a couple hundred specific selections on it because of that. The 4GB on board storage and a couple of 32GB micro SD cards do it for me. Besides, I can only listen to a couple hundred selections before the battery runs down anyway.

So, no, I don't have any MP3 files and have no intention of acquiring or creating any.

i utterly and fully understand if people make a conversion to whatever - for convience, to use the same conversion process... there are a dozen reasons. for many popular music recordings, though, soudn quality is not one of them. to not distract this too much from the LS50 topic, audiophiles are quick -in many cases justifiably so- "garbage in, garbage out". the same applies to a majority of recordings, sadly. 1960s motown recordings are not going to sound any better in FLAC because the recording was horrible - great as the music was. there all a large number of re-masters that sound a bit better, but are still horribly compromised. that was my point. the recording will not sound any better in FLAC than in 256k VBR MP3 (and aguably you could go lower) - clearly for many vintage recordings (note it did never say "all"), and arguably for many examples in popular music these days, too.

hence, since MP3 music is much easier to acquire than FLACs, i said that i am perfectly fine with MP3s i download. MP3 at >256k VBR sounds pretty sweet and is entirely enjoyable through an audiophile system - not saying it sounds better, not saying i wouldn't prefer to have a FLAC for whatever reason - just saying the MP3 sounds good enough if getting the FLAC entails much more work, in many cases. for jazz and classical i will go that extra mile.

finally, the convenience of MP3 is universal support. sure you can transcode to MP3, but again, that entails an amount of work i am not sure many recordings justify. note i am not stating my way is *better*, it is just more convenient for me, and i am convinced i am not scarificing sound quality for the recordings i pick good MP3 compression for.

I suppose where we really differ is downloading. I don't download music unless it's in one of the high(er) resolution formats. I'm simply not interested in any "crippled" music sources. If there is any crippling to be done I'll do it myself. At least I'll have un-crippled originals to refer to.

In addition, I have no interest in one selection here and another selection there. I only want a recording if it's the entire CD or LP. I don't even bother with the free MP3 files that Amazon routinely offers with most CD purchases. The price of easily available used CD's, often <$5, makes them actually cheaper than downloading half a dozen MP3 files.

I would probably feel quite different if I didn't have 46+ years of collecting recorded music. I have the original LP's of all those "lo-fi" Motown, Stax, Atlantic and other early recordings.

With all that said, IMO those KEF's sound superb. For some they may have more than adequate bass despite their small size.

I think we agree whole-heartedly. I am not new to this - been collecting music since the early 80s (vinyl) and switched to CDs prolly around 89/90 (some HORRIBLE recordings in xxD those days ugh). i think  the only difference is while i am really hard-core about making sure i have key recordings in non-lossy format, on the other hand i am also OK with keeping others as a CD-quality MP3 (>VBR 256k) - either when i subjectively deem them unworthy of being FLAC(1) or when they are unattainable in another format. I'd rather listen to more music I like than artifically limit my experience to ONLY unceompressed music I guess.

when i ripped my entire CD and LP collection, i did mostly into FLAC, hey, why not. same workflow. do all albums warrant it? no. but it was easier. as you said, now we talk about online downloads: i will check amazon for new stuff, and if i care about the recording, i'll check HDtracks or other higher resolutions sources, and if it is not there, i will get the MP3 on amazon. and with 256k+ VBR i can hear when there is a recording where i should really make an effort to get it on FLAC - and where i shouldn't bother :)

(1) I think that is a highly personal approach to it - I guess I use FLAC as an expression of how much I care to get the utmost out of a performance that is *really* important for me. FLAC is audiophile shrine stuff, MP3 shows i am less passionate about it. makes sense to me - don't expect it to make sense to anyone else. Bill Evans, John Coltrane, Joe Henderson... so many more... I need them as FLAC to make sure I get every nuance and convince myself I am doing my utmost to juice every drop out of it. With other stuff I am OK listening to a good enough pasteurized version. :)

Running time is pretty long for the KEF LS50's to run in and loose their slight treble edge - the bass can be extended if necessary by placing them on stands close to the room boundaries, takes some time to find the best location but well worth it. Stick with them and you will be rewarded with superb sound quality.

pablolie:

Since I've never downloaded any music files I've never acquired any MP3 files. All the music files that are on my player or music server came from my collection. Storage space is cheap and I see (hear) no reason to compromise my listening in any way.

Using only FLAC for music stored on my computer and portable player seemed to me the only way for a couple of reasons. Having a couple hundred of my favorite selections on my Sansa ClipZip is more than adequate for my portable use as I have no desire to carry my entire collection with me. In addition I'll never listen to 1600+ CD's or 3500+ LP's while I'm on the go anyway. Although I've ripped my CD collection to FLAC files on my music server I've not started on my LP's. I may rip some of my favorites but I simply have too many to rip all of them. All the CD's easily fit on a 1TB HDD as FLAC files. I use another identical drive for a backup. They are certainly cheap enough at less than $100 each. 

I don't really like headphones anyway. Extended hospital visits with chemotherapy treatments are what prompted me to get a portable player. I'm big on having a good sound stage. Many confuse a sound stage with imaging. I don't. Unfortunately no headphones I've ever tried (I've tried plenty) have ever produced sound that was anything but a straight line from one ear to the other. That results in great imaging but absolutely no sound stage. Besides, having the sound come from a line directly from one ear to the other has always seemed sort of creepy to me. Nevertheless the Sansa and a pair of Grado headphones have made chemotherapy reasonably tolerable.

Back  to Torxx:

Stick with the LS50's. Just have some patience. If you find you still want more/better bass I suggest you give an REL sub woofer an audition.

There are a lot of ways you could go, since you are back at square one. The sound quality refinement and lack of harshness you are looking for seems similar to my preferences. I personally find that, as you have noted, this is only available from B & K if you go to their most expensive speakers. This is why I seldom recommend that brand. There are many other possibilities to consider.

I suggest that you consider a pair of Vandersteen 2Ce Signature II speakers, which are $2395. Vandersteen routinely wins "Best of Show" at the various high-end shows all over the world, and have always been known for their sonic purity and lack of undesirable colorations.

They are by FAR the best-selling high-end speakers in the world for all time; over 200,000 sold (documented in a Stereophile article a while back); and very few people who buy Vandersteens ever go to anything else...except more expensive Vandersteens...lol.

I started with the 2B many years ago, and moved to the Model 3 and 3A later, and now have the Treos (sound to die for...but $6500).

If you want bookshelf/monitor type speakers (not floorstanders), I suggest that you consider some of the excellent speakers made by Focal.

The Focal Electra 1007 speakers were $3500, but are reduced to $2000 now at Music Direct. Those are very nice-sounding speakers. Music Direct will give you 30 days to decide whether to keep them.

2 feet out from the wall behind them is fine for those Vandy's. That's about the distance I arrived at for mine. Best balance between room gain and clarity.  

I don't think 2 feet is any problem at all for the Model 2.

I had my Model 2 speakers closer than that, and that was the best position I found.

That distance is strictly an issue for bass quality, and there are other room issues that are actually more important. Putting them closer to the rear wall will usually INCREASE the amount of bass, but possibly with some slight loss of bass clarity.

The effect of the rear wall distance also is changed when you tilt the speakers somewhat (as most people do), or toe them in a bit. You just have to follow the detailed setup instructions in the Owner's manual.

When I went to the Model 3 speakers they needed to be about 3 feet out for the best bass quality, but the model 2 doesn't need anywhere near as much.

Torxx wrote:

Thanks commsysman for the recommendations. Interestingly, I have been considering the Vandy 2Ce; however, the recommended distance from the rear of the speaker to the wall is a deal breaker for my room. About 2 feet is the max I have to work with in that regard. The Focal sounds like worth looking at.

That is one heckuva proposed change-night and day to my ears.  Despite all the hyperbole about the LS50 speakers (and I've heard them a few times) I don't think I could ever be happy with them, unless you had a phenomeneally integrated sub (REL?).  The LS50 sound did not appeal to me-I just wanted to turn them down (I forget the electronics the dealer had hooked up but it was good stuff). 

Of course moving from what I consider to be a highly analytical speaker to a highly 'musical' (that's a nice way to express it...) Vandy is interesting.  I've always thought they were a bit too warm but perhaps the latest Ce version is different (I have heard their higher end stuff and found it great).  (No offense intended but 'selling a lot' is the kind of line Bose might use to claim their speakers are great.)

From my experience with Focals, I'd consider them in between the KEF and Vandersteen sound.  You might really enjoy them as I have in the past at shows and dealers.  Hang in there; finding the pair you love is worth a little time and energy!  Good luck.

I had the same experience when auditioning these speakers - they had particularly harsh treble when I first heard them, and had written them off completely. A few months later I returned to the same dealer, who told me they had finally broken in. I reluctantly gave them a listen with the same components, and was surprised to hear a now-smooth treble and a nicely integrated high, mid and bass (as much bass as possible, anyway). Like Audio Research gear, these things need a good 250+ hours to sound as they should, which is really quite good.

Hi pablolie and others familiar with the LS50 character. I appreciate helping me with speaker selection.
I have B&W 685 for about 1.5 years and though they sounded nice at the retailers shop, I never really settled with their forwardness when listening at home. I soon realized that they could sound cold and grainy depending on the material. Detail, dynamics and soundstage were always very good.
I realized that I must replace those speakers. I aim for LS50 based on reviews and comments from users. I like good detail, but prefer musicality and smoothness over it. I auditioned almost the full line of B&W and bar for PM-1, they all sound very similar to me, detailed but forward with pronounced mids in the 900-1200 Hz range. Also, 600 series and CM series reproduction of higher octaves of piano is often thin and I would dare to say congested.
Unfortunately, I cannot audition LS50 in my country. The closest KEF speaker I auditioned was R300 and it sounded much better in the mids compared to 685.
So, please let me know if LS-50 is a speaker that will deliver warm, smooth, balanced but also sufficiently detailed sound? What amp would you pair with those speakers in the <1000 EUR range (I have Marantz, Rotel, NAD and Cambridge Audio locally).
What alternatives would you suggest? I liked PM-1, but I'm afraid to repeat the mistake and still end-up with B&W character of sound.

Thank you

P.S.
I forgot to mention that my musical taste is such that I listen to any music but most of the time jazz duos, trios or small combos (bass, piano, drums or bass+piano, guitar) and piano classical. The speaker should be very good at reproducing double bass, piano and guitar. I also occasionally listen to pop and rock. For bass extension I would try to pair the speakers with my B&W ASW-608 which served very good with my exisiting 685s. My listening room is a half area of my combined (living + dining) room of approx. 5mx5m

Nice job hijacking the thread. to the OP I have found when upgrading components integrating them takes a lot of time and patience and even if a dealer puts together a complimentary system in his showroom and you go for it at home your own room acoustics might undermine all the careful system matching that made magic in the showroom. while kef's uniq is probably one of the most consistent, predictable performers they really need everything in the chain to play nice together. it's to bad you returned them before you could try biwiring with a few brands of wire.

I personally hate the 685s from B&W. Cold and grainy is a good way to describe them. I auditioned the CM5s and the PM-1s when I was looking and I liked the CM5s better. The PM-1s are overly detailed to a point where it rapidly becomes annoying. I liked the CM5s a lot but was a bit concerned they would be a bit too forward.

The LS50s are just awesome, especially if you are in a smaller space. They are the most neutral speaker I think I have ever heard but suffer two small issues. First is at higher volumes, say over 95dB, you will get a little bit of compression at certain frequencies. If you like listening at high volumes, they may not be ideal. Second is they are good but not great off axis. If you have less than ideal speaker placements in mind, I would think twice about the LS50s. That being said, I would say they are superior to the R300 in almost every meaningful way.

Other notes, the LS50s are neutral, not warm. If you want to add a touch of warmth, I would look at either Marantz or NAD integrated amps to drive them. They are slightly warm. The LS50s are inefficient and you may want to deliver a bit more power to them. If it is on budget, the Marantz PM8005 would be excellent. The PM7005 is a nice unit as is the NAD 356BEE. If Peachtree is available, the Nova65se is excellent. I don't know the Rotel or Cambridge units well enough to offer an opinion.

that B&WS sub is an interesting unit. Some people love it. I was under whelmed by it personally and went with what I thought was a more musical Mirage sub with the B&W M1s I have. My hunch is, you are going to find that sub inadequate with the LS50s. I would look at Rel, Sunfire's HRS line, SVS, NHTs B-10d or B-12d as cleaner sounding alternatives. That being said, I would try the B&W first and see if you like it.

Two other speakers worth listening too are the Revel Performan3 M105s and the Dynaudio Excite X14s. They are priced the same as the Kefs and if you have a poor room layout or enjoy listening at very high volumes, they are outstanding alternatives. I personally own the Revels because I have a room with a bad layout and need strong off axis performance. They are also just slightly warm.

Thank you bierfeldt!

Your post is immensely useful, especially because you seem to have same perception of B&W 685 as I do and have also tried some other B&W speakers which I disliked, too. It also helps describing the character of LS50 and to my joy (I've grown with Marantz sound) that pairing it with Marantz would add warmth.
I was also thinking of a used Harman Kardon HK990. Any experience with that amp?
Thank you for the other speakers suggestion. This May I'm visiting Highend show in Munich and I hope to audition some of your suggestions. Maybe in some shop if I don't find that particular models in the fair. I look forward to the chance to educate my ears on what high end sound really is and what sound character I would like and dislike.
One final question: given your subject about perfect neutrality, would you describe LS50 as neither forward nor laid back? I start to understand that too much forwardness (like 685s and other B&W) help distinguish those speakers while audiitoning, but at home it's simply too intrusive and quickly becomes tiring.

steve59 wrote:

Nice job hijacking the thread. to the OP I have found when upgrading components integrating them takes a lot of time and patience and even if a dealer puts together a complimentary system in his showroom and you go for it at home your own room acoustics might undermine all the careful system matching that made magic in the showroom. while kef's uniq is probably one of the most consistent, predictable performers they really need everything in the chain to play nice together. it's to bad you returned them before you could try biwiring with a few brands of wire.

Hi steve59,
Thank you for your comment. I apologize for any unconvenience (hijacking the threasd). I am new to stereophile forum and not aware for the best location to post my LS50 related questions. Please help me and point what I did wrong?

Thnak you

They will seem forward until you add a sub. The poor bass response makes them seem that way. They are neither forward or laid back and are neither bright nor are they warm. With the right subwoofer, these are truly elite speakers. The B&Ws are unquestionably forward and I find them very fatiguing. Every speaker I have heard from B&W pretty much would be described as forward. At the same price as the Kefs, the CM5 is one of their better sounding, more balanced speakers. For other speakers in the price range that are worth listening too, Wharfedales Jade line to me is warm yet balanced. The Revel Performa3 line is a hair warm and I think a touch laid back. The Dynaudio Excite line is neutral and maybe a hair forward. The Monitor Audio Gold line are a touch more expensive but are very neutral and are a touch laid back.

Dali, Roksan, Rega, Paradigm, Sonus, Acoustic Zen and a bunch of other companies make awesome speakers in the $1500 to $3500 price range. An audio show will be a great place to experience a bunch of brands and listen to the different character of each speaker.

Regarding hijacking the thread, you could have started a new thread under speakers or in entry level. the advantage is, new threads tend to get more attention. In this case, this thread had been untouched for about 6 weeks so it is really no big deal. Welcome to the forum and it is always good to have new members.

Thank you again,

That's a ton of useful information that only an objective user can give. No magazine would dare to describe with such straightforward language. I'm also glad I am not imagining things in my head when I felt that many of the B&W speakers I heard sounded simply forward and not neutral. And maybe I could have get used to that forwardness of 685s if it wasn't for their terrible honkyness that spilt the water from the glass. I could hear a touches of that honkyness in even some of their CMs. I tried to nail the source of that honkyness but could't. I used Dirac DSP software to flatten them throughout the full range. although Dirac managed to produce much better sounding speaker and tame the forwardness, the honkyness was still there. So I guess it's either a lively box or suboptimal integratin with the tweeter.

BR

A lot of people really like B&W speakers because of how much detail they offer and how forward they are. Being forward is not inherently bad. In certain situations, this is awesome and that level of detail produces those "wow" moments. Not everyone is easily fatigued.

Alternatively, laid back speakers have problems. They may not be fatiguing but what are you missing in what you are listening too? The key is finding the balance that is right for your.

All high end audio equipment is a matter of personal taste. Speakers are the most subjective, but every bit of equipment sounds different and each has its defenders and critics. One of the biggest challenges in this hobby to me is a willingness to ignore the brand and price and just listen and find what you truly like.

Have you considered B&W Cm5 S2? SAME price as LS50. And they still have that "B&W Sound" which you already expressed you liked. Depending on genre and room placement and listening position, you may be surprised to know these little bookshelves can go below 40Hz in my direct experience. If you need 30Hz range... you will still need sub(s) of course. But musically, 40Hz should be good to go.

Kind Regards,

Ron

I listened to the LS50s at the weekend and did not have as big a smile on my face as I had expected, I hope this is due to lack of "run in" from listening to some shelf display units otherwise I start to wonder on the amount of fanfare they are receiving. They lacked bass, highs were very sweet and the whole sound was super tight but I found slightly dry. 9driven by roksan k3)

The demo guy hooked up some monitor audio silver 1s which I hadnt been looking at at all as there is not really much chatter on the internet for these but I was rather impressed. They went much deeper than the ls50s and had a warm and sweet sound with plenty of detail. I wanted to justify the extra on teh LS50s as they are the ones I had set my mind on originally but I feel myself coming back to the MA's.

I will be going back to listen to them again and maybe try with some diff amp combos and see if end up with the same conclusions.

I recommend people to demo the Monitor Audios thought they seem to be flying under the radar somewhat.

The bass reponse on the LS50s is poor. They need a subwoofer. If you are looking for a pair of bookshelf speakers that will be autonomous and function without a sub, the LS50s are an awful choice. That Roksan Caspian is an awesome amp, that was not driving mediocre sound. Listen to those Kefs with a nice, sealed sub and it will change everything. They are neutral and detailed. Not warm. They still may not be for you, but will sound radically different in a good way paired with the right subwoofer. I personally selected the Revel Performa3s over the Kefs because of the touch of warmth I got from them.

I really like the Monitor Audio Silver 1s and 2s. Compared to the $1500 speakers, they do lack detail. I was using Don't Give Up from Peter Gabriel off of Secret World Live as one of my Demo tracks. I found some of the background crowd noise and a few other details that I could hear on the Kefs, Revel Performa3 M105s, the Dynaudio Excite X14s, the Wharfedale Jade 3s and the B&W CM5s was missing. It is little things but some of those little things add to the charm of a recrding, particularly live ones. The extreme opposite is the B&Ws. I found the B&Ws accentuate those little details and they were so forward that it becomes annoying. It's striking the right balance.

That being said, The MA 1s and 2s are quite a bit less expensive so something has to drop off. I found them to be forgiving relative to that higher price point. For the money, I like them very much along with the Peachtree D5s which have better bass performance than the MAs.

All of these are worth listening too if you have the time and a dealer network in your area that carries them.

bass response depends on room and positioning, in smaller rooms or close enough to them it may be totally sufficient. i got a sub to pair with them but keep it turned off most of the time. you definitely have to be into an analytical signature to like the LS50. i am and hence consider them among the best at any price, especially if you sit about 6-7ft from them. setting up a crossover to improve their performance marginally is just too complicated for me. it can be done. but mine are set up full range, the sub just kicks in on occasion below 65hz and i keep it at 10% volume (when it's on, which is 20% of the time, max).

I just got back from High end society show in Munich. That was a very useful experience for me which I want to share in regards to LS50.
Went to KEF's boot, but they only presented their Blades. KEF guys directed me to some cable company to which they borrowed a pair of LS50. It was played from a mac/DAC/amp but the speakers were seated on an office desk. My first impression was not good at all, the sound coming from the speakers was bland and unexciting. Because it was a noisy booth, I decided to schedule a proper listening session at a local dealer, just after the end of the show.
I had a smallish room (about 2.5m by 4m), carpet on the full surface of the floor, two massive bass traps and some treatments on the walls. The amp was some sort of Naim combo and I streamed my music from an iPhone via Blutooth and alternatively from a USB disk. The KEFs were a well brake-in pair that they would sell with a good discount, placed on sturdy stands almost a meter away from back wall.
I was very enthusiastic, almost hot from the possibility to get back home with my LS50 bargain. I spent about an hour listening in very quiet room, but at the end I almost hated myself for the fact they didn't put a smile on my face.
How did they sound?
Well, the bass in that room was rocking, it was deep and with that slam and pressure characteristic to sub-woofers. At that session I didn't miss bass at all and felt I would never need a sub with this pair. It wasn't perfectly defined (sometimes I couldn't easily discern the pitch from note to note of a double bass) but nothing to complain much about.
The mids were clear and absent of any coloration that bothered me with many other 2 ways. The speaker was slightly forgiving to not optimal recordings (which I like) but what bothered me is that in that small room I felt that speaker still quite forward sounding.
What left me disappointing was actually the lack of excitement and musicality that I attributed to a rolled off last one and a half octaves. Cymbals were too quiet, there was no air and I felt the urge to add some treble control which was missing on that Naim.

I was dazed and decided to give myself an hour of walk and rethinking everything I went through the same day. Finally, I didn't bite the bullet. These speakers full-filed about 80% of my expectations and would never bother me regarding bass or coloration, but I'm still not sure if the forwardness was due to the small listening distance and the reason for the recessed highs.
I admit that I don't have much of a pedigree with audiophile grade equipment and might be just me lacking a sense of refinement, but at the and of the day I should be happy with my choice and follow my senses.

As very often happens with me next day (a little too late) I regretted I didn't use the opportunity (800 Eur/pair) and gave them a proper chance at my home. Still thorn if it's me needing more mid-recessed and airy speakers or it was that small room and setup that killed the excitement.

In my previous post I explained about my experience with LS50 on the show and the demo and truly LS50 is clean of any midrange coloration or congestion. Piano 5th octave sounded as it should, coming from a large soundboard, with body and spaceousness, not a tinkly beam. There was no honkyness either which bothers me with my and other models of that famous yellow kevlar company, but some others as well.
Overall, the show was a very good experience for me, I managed to listen several superb sounding speakers, but the grand conclusion I took with me was that none of them tricked me for a live performance.
Only speaker close to that illusion was a dipole design (can't remember make and model) with a sound that was markedly above competition in terms of realism, at least to my ears.
Overall, the show was good and well organized, but with a significant crosstalk from booth to booth and some companies didn't even bother to play their speakers. Unfortunately, Harbeth was such an example and I was short of tasting their renowned speakers. As the name of the show implies, it's a show favoring high end and very expensive range of products, but it's a unique opportunity to hear that equipment that for many of us is simply unreachable.

Thanks for reading.

Bought these for my office, based on all the glowing reviews.
What a disappointment…
I was going to replace my (very) old Epos… not even close. Yes, you can play them louder, but they have about 1/3 the resolution. So murky and slow. I am at complete loss here, not sure what others are raving about. Built is very nice, but who cares if they sound the way they do. Even my son pass, when I asked if he wants them for his bedroom.

All:

One must seriously take into account room acoustics, speaker placement, and system synergy.
From what I read in this thread, none of these variables were constant except the speakers!

What I suggest to get more bass out of *ANY* bookshelf speaker:

Smaller, rectangular rooms are best if possible...

Place speakers 6-7 feet apart, and 1 foot from rear wall.

Place your listening chair 6-7 feet from each speaker; making a triangle with each leg equal in length.

Toe in speakers 15 degrees or not at all.

You will here a deeper Bass. If the room length is not longer than say 12-14', now go back and sit 1-2' in front of the back wall...and you will hear VERY DEEP BASS.

Even with mismatched components.

Try that if anyone is not satisfied with bass response from bookshelf speakers.

After much research and using different speaker positioning methods, I have found this placement always best for bass. I have removed my subwoofer and no longer need it for my Epos Epic 2's.

Respectfully,

Ron

It would just be that you prefer a more forward sound which tends to sound much more detailed. The Kefs are not forward.

Assuming you can return the Kefs, consider the B&W CM5 if no subwoofer is paired or CM6 if you have a subwoofer or the Paradigm Prestige 15Bs. Ratings and reviews trend toward "neutral" but that is relative. People have diverse tastes and what you like I may hate and vice versa. Try these B&Ws or Paradigms and you will likely hear the increased level of detail you are looking for.