Description: Three-way, reflex-loaded, floorstanding loudspeaker. Drive-units: Uni-Q driver array with 1" (25mm) vented aluminum-dome tweeter, 5" (125mm) aluminum-cone midrange unit, four 6.5" (165mm) aluminum-cone woofers. Crossover frequencies: 350Hz, 2.8kHz. Frequency response: 40Hz–35kHz, ±3dB. Frequency range: typical in-room bass response, 25Hz, –6dB; free field, short port, 35Hz–45kHz, –6dB; free field, long port, 32Hz–45kHz, –6dB. Sensitivity: 90dB/2.83V/m. Nominal impedance: 8 ohms. Minimum impedance: 3.2 ohms. Harmonic distortion (2nd & 3rd harmonics at 90dB, 1m): <0.5%, 40Hz–100kHz; <0.2%, 200Hz–10kHz. Maximum output: 116dB (peak sound-pressure level at 1m with pink noise). Recommended amplifier power: 50–400W.
Dimensions: 53.1" (1350mm) H by 8" (205mm) W by 18.5" (470mm) D. Weight: 132.7 lbs (60kg).
Finishes: Piano Black, Satin American Walnut & Gloss Rosewood, Blue Ice White and Copper Black Aluminum "Kent Engineering and Foundry Edition."
Serial numbers of units reviewed: Kent Engineering and Foundry Edition 0066 (both).
Price: $19,000/pair. Approximate number of dealers: 60 plus direct.
Manufacturer: GP Acoustics (UK) Ltd., Ecceleston Road, Tovil, Maidstone, Kent ME15 6QP, England, UK. US distributor: GP Acoustics (US) Inc., 10 Timber Lane, Marlboro, NJ 07746. Tel: (732) 683-2356. Fax: (732) 683-2358. Web: www.kef.com.
 | |||||||||||
|
|
| |||||||||
COMMENTS
The last two photos on page 2 are not of the Reference 5. The last one is the Reference 3, the one above... dunno what it is but it ain't the Referene 5.
Also, the treble rolloff compared to the Blade 2 was interesting and unexpected.
The last two photos on page 2 are not of the Reference 5. The last one is the Reference 3, the one above... dunno what it is but it ain't the Reference 5.
Thanks. Replaced the final image with one more appropriate; the one above it is a closeup of the loudspeaker's outrigger base.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
but I think it's a closeup of the Reference 1's stand (see link):
https://www.kefdirect.com/speakers/hi-fi-speakers/the-reference/bookshelf-speaker-stand-reference-1.html
Also, enjoyed the review, I've been curious about the differences between this and the blade 2.
Your story about the HVAC system noise reminded me of the time I recorded a visiting guitarist at The University of Texas in like '91, don't remember his name but he was quite good. I had originally gone with Neumann KM86's in crossed fig. 8 to get plenty of the room (was very nice - the reverb had a fully enveloping syrupy quality to it sitting in the audience, since ruined when they tore out the pipe organ) but forgot to take into account that it was cold/flu/allergy season - the coughing and sneezing was so bad that it was drowning out the guitarist so... at intermission (figuring the 1st half was unlistenable anyway) I ran out, moved the mics back a bit and switched them to cardiod. The artist was probably both annoyed and relieved (never heard back about it) but the 2nd half turned out quite nicely.
PS UT eventually replaced the organ in the recital hall.
An Aeolian-Skinner organ was installed in the old music building's Jessen Auditorium, replacing the one removed. The huge Visser-Rowland tracker in the Music Recital Hall is still going strong!
the one above it is a closeup of the loudspeaker's outrigger base.
And I was wrong. So I have replaced that one with a cutaway picture of the Reference 5's enclosure.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
ain't nobody perfect.
Edit: lookin' through, like the new photos/progression.
... wave-guide/phase-plug an Altec-Lansing invention?
http://www.preservationsound.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Altec_Model_15_18_1977.jpg
Just curious, what is the magnitude of your resonance at ~30 Hz without smoothing? Do you have any issues with clipping at that frequency when taking your measurements with FuzzMeasure, if so, how do you deal with it to assure that the rest of the spectrum is not affected (maybe it doesn't matter)?
Cheers!
I struggle to remember the last speaker review I read in Stereophile that described the sound as a bit too sweet. I recall the majority are either neutral (yay!) or overly bright or the tweeter is simply a few db too high in level. As someone who has recently moved into a room that's a bit bright, I now recognize that a bit of sweetness can be just what the doctor ordered, especially for those who recordings aren't impeccable. Great review and video interview!
Yes, especially coming from Thiels, I found the KEF Reference 1 (same uni-q driver) to also be “sweet” to the point of sounding dull and rounded off on some darker recordings. Even recordings I know to be bright sounded polite, and not as detailed as I was used to.
I have them about 78” apart and about 96” from the seating position in a small room 12’ x +/- 14’ with 9’ ceilings. Hardwood floor with an area rug and rear wall/side wall acoustic treatments, bookshelf on the other side. I’d say it’s a moderately live and certainly not overly damped room. They were firing straight ahead.
And then I tried toeing them in so that the baffles are firing straight at the listening position in the middle. It’s probably something like +/- 20 degrees toed-in now, and I have to say, the increase and improvement in treble response is SUBSTANTIAL, bordering on dramatic.
These will never be bright speakers, probably not even in live rooms. But at least now they sound sufficiently detailed and crisp that I’m really enjoying them.
Bass is excellent and goes deep and tight for a stand mount, and I think the midrange is standout in clarity and detail. And the imaging is still great - maybe even better - toed-in. Not sacrificing appreciable soundstage width or depth either.
If things sound bright in your lively room and you prefer it sweet, you might want to try the opposite tack and toe your speakers out, or at least not toe them in.
These things are Beautiful.
As long as they sing nearly as well as they look they'll be big hits ( especially with the Wife's decorator).
B&O stuff is kinda overly strange looking.
Is there a more beautiful loudspeaker ?
Tony in Michigan
ps. betcha the rest of the UK speaker outfits are a bit envious.
T.I.M.: If the REF-5's are simply an extension of the REF-1's, it's a superb loudspeaker.
Personally, I believe the Reference 3 may be the best choice -and sounding.
I urge you to download and read KEF's excellent (informative) White Paper that at once is both technically astute and easy-to-read.
Not many expensive loudspeakers (to my knowledge) have and/or reveal some basic design elements; including enclosure/baffle board material composition, bracing choices, driver fastening method (KEF REF uses 6-8 BOLTS per driver -with the critical MF/HF driver no less bolted to a steel plate) and or crossover considerations -and implementations.
This and far more is discussed in this excellent White Paper.
If the equipment preceding the KEF (Reference) is up to snuff, you will be left thrilled by its sheer accuracy, delicacy, nuance, explosive dynamics and sheer realism.
peter jasz
Hi John,
I have been using the 207/2 for a loooong time and they still do it for me. How do the 2 loudspeakers compare? Bit worried about the build quality of the ref. 5. The 207/2's are build like a tank.
Cheers and all the best wishes for 2018! :-) Wim
I have been using the 207/2 for a loooong time and they still do it for me. How do the 2 loudspeakers compare?
I reviewed the R207/2 in February 2008 and my system has undergone many changes since I last listened to it. But I think you still have many years ahead of you with the R207/2s. Keep 'em!
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Thanks John, keep up the good work! Wim
There appears to be something odd with Figure 6, the +5 & -5 responses are flat lines while the 0 degree line is not normalized.
Wait- everything I’ve read about the KEF Reference series ports says that the longer ports extend low end frequency response with a gradual roll off, while the shorter ones offer a flatter bass response but with a higher, steeper LF cutoff. In effect, the shorter ones offer a punchier response but don’t go as low, so are better if the speakers are closer to the front wall.
Is what this article is saying about the port length effects consistent with this?
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 Stereophile
