I love reading reviews and pay attention to them, especially if they are supplemented by a standard measurement regime. Reviews that start or end with ?the best ever? or ?chalk and cheese differences? leave me cold. If a reviewer can throw light on subtle differences between components and also keep the prize bracket in mind, I find it far more credible even though I am always mindfull that is it still a very personal view. The review below was a good example of a piece that I find interesting. Coincidentally the 2nd last paragraph hints at something that correlates with my own impressions.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-q350-loudspeaker
LS3/5a Comparisons
The three versions I have of the BBC's classic LS3/5a minimonitor are all of the same size, weight, and construction quality, and measure as identically as any three speakers could. But they sound surprisingly different. Each in turn sat on the TonTr?ger stands in the same positions in my room.
The Falcon LS3/5a ($2995/pair) is the most uncolored, most precise loudspeaker in my bunker collection. I own the pair of them, they're my primary reference, and I'll never let them go. But I hadn't used the Falcons in a while, and had forgotten how refined, descriptive, and naturally toned they are.
When I switched from the KEF Q350s to the Falcons, still using the TonTr?ger stands, it was as if someone had vacuumed the last vestiges of fog from the space surrounding Janet Baker's voice. With Elvis Presley's first-ever recording, "My Happiness," from A Boy from Tupelo: The Complete 1953?1955 Recordings (3 CDs, RCA/Legacy 8985-41773-2), Elvis seemed even more three-dimensional. When audiophiles speak of resolution, they usually mean seeing and hearing into the performing space and down into the recording's noise floor. This type of resolution is the Falcons' specialty. When I compared them with the Q350s, I realized that it was also one of the KEFs' best traits.
My infatuation with the Stirling Broadcast LS3/5a V2 ($1990/pair) is based entirely on its greater fullness at the bottom and the liquid flow of its sound. It makes the Falcon LS3/5a sound slightly dry and tipped up in comparison. Compared to both the Stirling and Falcon LS3/5a's, my original "white badge," 15-ohm Rogers LS3/5a seemed a little sluggish and fuzzy.
But the Stirling is the most different-sounding of the three BBCs?and the one that sounded most like the KEF Q350. The Stirling LS3/5a V2 and the Q350 each produced a more relaxed warmth than the Rogers or Falcon, and, for reasons I don't quite understand, a larger soundstage.
I am a student and admirer of British boxes, but if I could keep only one, I would keep the LS50?but only when I'm an audio reviewer. The LS50 is a benchmark for accurate octave-to-octave energy balance and tonal neutrality?a reference-quality speaker if ever there was one. If I were just Herb, listening alone in my bunker, I'd keep the Stirling LS3/5a V2s because they make me forget audiophilia. If I were Herb the amp builder, I'd keep the Falcons because they're the most revealing of whatever drives them. If I wanted only to impress other audiophiles, I'd keep my collectible 1984 Rogers. But if I lived with my romantic partner, I'd keep the KEF Q350s, because they reproduced the widest range of music?including techno, bluegrass, reggae, and pop?in a musically satisfying way.
Conclusions
Early in this review process I realized that KEF's Q350 is not the poor person's LS50, but has a unique goodness of its own. Comparing the two KEFs became a case study in the fundamental ways speaker enclosures and crossover slopes can affect the sound character of the drivers they support. To my ears, dense, highly damped boxes and/or steep-sloped crossovers can sound subliminally thick and restrained. In contrast, lightly damped boxes with first-order crossovers add some loose, not-so-subliminal noise to the midrange?but they can also jump, sound expansive, and dance like Fred and Ginger.
The KEF Q350 is a lively and open-sounding loudspeaker. It delivers appealing tone, taut and satisfying bass, excellent boogie factor, and a feeling of sophistication?all at a very low price. Highly recommended.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-q350-loudspeaker
LS3/5a Comparisons
The three versions I have of the BBC's classic LS3/5a minimonitor are all of the same size, weight, and construction quality, and measure as identically as any three speakers could. But they sound surprisingly different. Each in turn sat on the TonTr?ger stands in the same positions in my room.
The Falcon LS3/5a ($2995/pair) is the most uncolored, most precise loudspeaker in my bunker collection. I own the pair of them, they're my primary reference, and I'll never let them go. But I hadn't used the Falcons in a while, and had forgotten how refined, descriptive, and naturally toned they are.
When I switched from the KEF Q350s to the Falcons, still using the TonTr?ger stands, it was as if someone had vacuumed the last vestiges of fog from the space surrounding Janet Baker's voice. With Elvis Presley's first-ever recording, "My Happiness," from A Boy from Tupelo: The Complete 1953?1955 Recordings (3 CDs, RCA/Legacy 8985-41773-2), Elvis seemed even more three-dimensional. When audiophiles speak of resolution, they usually mean seeing and hearing into the performing space and down into the recording's noise floor. This type of resolution is the Falcons' specialty. When I compared them with the Q350s, I realized that it was also one of the KEFs' best traits.
My infatuation with the Stirling Broadcast LS3/5a V2 ($1990/pair) is based entirely on its greater fullness at the bottom and the liquid flow of its sound. It makes the Falcon LS3/5a sound slightly dry and tipped up in comparison. Compared to both the Stirling and Falcon LS3/5a's, my original "white badge," 15-ohm Rogers LS3/5a seemed a little sluggish and fuzzy.
But the Stirling is the most different-sounding of the three BBCs?and the one that sounded most like the KEF Q350. The Stirling LS3/5a V2 and the Q350 each produced a more relaxed warmth than the Rogers or Falcon, and, for reasons I don't quite understand, a larger soundstage.
I am a student and admirer of British boxes, but if I could keep only one, I would keep the LS50?but only when I'm an audio reviewer. The LS50 is a benchmark for accurate octave-to-octave energy balance and tonal neutrality?a reference-quality speaker if ever there was one. If I were just Herb, listening alone in my bunker, I'd keep the Stirling LS3/5a V2s because they make me forget audiophilia. If I were Herb the amp builder, I'd keep the Falcons because they're the most revealing of whatever drives them. If I wanted only to impress other audiophiles, I'd keep my collectible 1984 Rogers. But if I lived with my romantic partner, I'd keep the KEF Q350s, because they reproduced the widest range of music?including techno, bluegrass, reggae, and pop?in a musically satisfying way.
Conclusions
Early in this review process I realized that KEF's Q350 is not the poor person's LS50, but has a unique goodness of its own. Comparing the two KEFs became a case study in the fundamental ways speaker enclosures and crossover slopes can affect the sound character of the drivers they support. To my ears, dense, highly damped boxes and/or steep-sloped crossovers can sound subliminally thick and restrained. In contrast, lightly damped boxes with first-order crossovers add some loose, not-so-subliminal noise to the midrange?but they can also jump, sound expansive, and dance like Fred and Ginger.
The KEF Q350 is a lively and open-sounding loudspeaker. It delivers appealing tone, taut and satisfying bass, excellent boogie factor, and a feeling of sophistication?all at a very low price. Highly recommended.
