KEF LS50

Yes Taters that would be what I would say, at least based on my experience with the Harbeth sound which I love and have quite a bit of experience with.

As for the desktop, I have no doubt they would be great as nearfield monitors, I think they were designed with that in mind, they just might look odd on a normal sized desk, they are pretty good size.

Kef supplies some nice two piece foam plugs for the rear port which really worked well in my set up, many ported designs don't hold up well when you start messing with the port. Point being you could put them on a desk and back them to a wall and still get good sound from them I would guess. Not ideal, but still likely quite good.

If I had to give their best attribute it would be that hard to find combination of a touch of tone density (warmth) with high resolution. They image like devils too.

Sorry Bob, did not realize I was fraternizing with the enemy:)!!

So this clear (and not to turn this into a Harbeth thread) but IMO they make the most musical speakers I have owned. The 40.1 is a marvel and worth full retail. I could go on and on about all the things they do that other speakers seem to have to trouble with.

One of those things Roscoelli hit on and that is how do speakers sound at low volumes. The holy grail of all high end audio to me is to have it all there at low volumes, no need to search for what is missing by turning the volume up. Novices miss this key point all the time. No speaker does this better than Harbeth and none better than the 40.1. Once you have you understand and it is one of the few elements that is much more dependent on the speaker than anything other part of the chain, electronics can't get you all the way there.

The LS50 is not bad in this respect but not the same league as Harbeth. My LS50 have less than 100 hrs on them, but they do seem to fill out some with a little more volume. Way better than most monitors which can often sound thin and anemic and unbalanced at low volumes.

I took a chance on the LS50 mostly out of curiosity and the reviews and knowing that lineage of Kef and Harbeth share much common ground and that I imagine Kef gunning for a sound similar to Harbeth (without admitting it)

I think the LS50 gets you 90% there at a fraction of the cost and also does some things possibly better including the illusion of a point source with wonderful imaging. Mine are placed near ear level seated and they sound really good at that height. They are much closer to the sound I am used to with Harbeth for considerably less cost hence my desire to share in the post.

All valid observations. I would disagree with BIll however that this just a small box speaker with a pretty midrange. Every two way has its breaking point, if not there would not be 10 models in front of the Magico Mini.

Kef was perfectly comfortable putting a version of this same driver flying solo out in the open to cover most of the audioband in their reference Blade. Never heard them but certainly have read nothing but praise for their performance, some suggesting they are a "bargain" at 30K. Certainly nothing to suggest that the bold move of a singe driver in a reference full ranger was causing compression given what should be expected from a 30K floorstander.

If anything I would say lack of compression is one of this speakers greatest attributes particularly at this price point. It keeps things together nicely at moderate listening levels even with complex material rock included. Maybe my room is ideal in size but I have yet to see them break much of a sweat..........

Bob,
Same for me. This is where Harbeth is great.Body, weight and resolution together. My experience is that the driver size and material makes a big difference here. This is where I was most skeptical of the KEF before the purchase.

the LS50 is really pretty good here, wind and string and male voice have the proper weight and body with great clarity. Overall a tad drier than Harbeth but very satisfying still.

What is different than the Harbeth is the tweeter and where it is located. It is an equally refined top end but has a little more bite on leading edges without drawing attention. Really nice with well miked Sax for example to have both the bite and the body, all originating from essentially a point source which adds its own distinctive realism if that makes sense.

I would think the LS50 would better compare to the 7s or possibly the 30.1. I imagine in certain areas it will not be up to par with the Harbeth's but in the important areas be very similar. Throw in some of the unique things that its driver design brings to the table which are audible (and postive in my mind), and they deserve to be in the conversation for sure.

I would have a hard time imagining that they would not bring significantly more to the table in terms of tone density and dynamics than the p3esr but I could be mistaken not to include the p3 in the discussion as well. I have never heard them, I am sure they are wonderful considering obvious limitations.

My LS50 are actually in a bookcase!! Big time audio no-no for a rear ported design. Interestingly its a really solid bookcase, I was able to fill the space with books and dark speaker stuffing and then I used half the port foam supplied by Kef and was shocked that I seem to have no peak and excellent speed in the bass and no overhang into the midrange. Normally this would be an acoustical disaster but now I have them much higher than they would be on stands and they are singing in the room they are in. Some luck involved there for sure......Point is they seem pretty forgiving of the rear port.