@@Tharbamar How come you find the Evo's sweetspot large when all reviewers and the graphs tell the opposite story, that they beam aggressively above 6kHz? People complain that the sound changes dramatically even when they move their hand a few inches to pick something from the table
I think the fact that a £1000 pair of loudspeakers (KEF) are being compared to a £600 pair of loudspeakers ( Wharfedales) says much more about the Wharfedales than it does about the Kefs. The sonic superiority of the Wharfedales is evident here, but to compound the value on offer just look at them, they are incredible looking, real head turners. Wharfedale are one of several UK loudspeaker companies that have a reputation of offering extremely good products at very competitive prices.
I in general agree with you, but we will need better information about the drivers, and finally, it comes to taste. Also KEF often are very good at low volume.
Thanks you very much for this great and usual Honest review. I follow and watch your video since a while and each time I really enjoy your approach, clear explanation of how speaker sound and above all your true honesty. Since month I am hesitating by picking up evo 4.2 and recently LS50 old model (since there are actually in discount at 600e) I just ordered evo 4.2 based on this last video because I see more of my taste will be filled by Evo. Thanks a lot for your great review and help ! Cedric
The Meta is impressive, but I'll take the Evo. Better balance, less fatiguing for extended listening periods. Can handle louder volumes better as well (as Tharbamar stated).
Great review, you commented on both of then in a down to earth way. I'll take the Evo's. KEF does exactly what most speaker manufacturers do these days, they throw a massive amount of detail at you forgetting what speakers should be designed for, that is enjoyment of music. The KEF's might sound better and less boxy in this comparison, that's only because of their sharpness. I used to pick my speakers based on this characteristic but what I found out is that after a week or two of listening to them that amazing detail becomes very fatiguing, taking away the joy and subtlety in music. And from this point on I'm rarely motivated to listen to music anymore, which defeats the whole purpose.
this is hard to even understand. have you ever heard an orchestra, opera live? it is the height of detail and is no way fatiguing. why would i want a speaker to diminish the music that's being played on the other end? it's like saying you'd prefer a blurry video so to leave more to the imagination, as if observing the world with your own eyeballs are fatiguing. do you play an instrument by chance? the difference here sounds like, for example, a cheap guitar vs. a quality handmade guitar. truth is, Evo just is not a speaker quality enough to reproduce the sounds of live music.
Great video, as someone that owns a pair of bright speakers, the Evo 4.2 will be perfect to use for when I am feeling fatigued. Thank you for this video.
The problem with audio reviews is that speakers and their sound are described with words. Without live listening it's only a road sign a hint. And after all that it goes to the most important thing that anyone can hear far more than difference between lets say those two speakers and it is room acoustics.
@@thruthspeaker2476 agreed, even good reviews with measurements and comparisons are not perfect methods to decide what to buy, but this review is useful enough that at least the reviewer deserves kudos
The vocals on the KEF could have cut glass it was so sharp. I have soon in the game with a pair of EVO 4.2 but I out my money where my mouth is, no regrets especially as I picked them up as ex demo for £350.
The 2nd track Scarborough Fair by Yao Is Ting clearly showed the difference in high frequencies. The Kef Meta is too bright and crisp that makes a fatiguing effect for long listening session. Evo 4.2 managed to present the female voice in a soft and easy to hear sound. Higher resolution and detailing of Kef has its own cons. The found that the bass in first track is better in Kef Meta because it is more controlled and tighter. Kef has done a brilliant job to deliver lows with such a small cabin. The Evo sounded a little boxy sound, it maybe because I am listening it on RUclips with Audio Technica headphones but Kef sounded better in lows. I think Evo is a better choice as it is a comparable speaker with meta in all aspects even with different prices. Both have their Ups and downs.
I do not agree. The Kef’s are not fatiguing on the long term at all. But they bring emotion of the singer into the room. That’s what I miss with the Evo’s, they sound good, but they lack the emotion I am looking for in music. For example, listen to the attack of the drum stick on the edge of the snare drum in sample 2. The LS50 has speed and depth in the sound, things I miss at the Evo.
@@next3576 my father used to own the ls50 and grew sick of them. The reason is very simple. Driver diversity results in lower distortion. I'm surprised at the compression I can hear on the bottom end.
Only a question: why the manufacturers give wrong datas/parameters at new loudspeakers? The evo 4.2 has 150 mm bass driver, not 6,5".The diamond 10.2 has 6,5",yes +just a little bit bigger...🤔 The good old loudspeakers if you read that in catalog at speaker size 8" there was a real 200mm speaker. Why need to cosmetic these datas? The size is an important thing at woofers/midbass drivers because of the moving air mass. I know today manufacturing long throw bass units etc with little size but never will be good as a simple old real 8" or 10" bass driver.
@@AbsoluteFidelity This thing reminds me the cheap speakers where the "size"(diameter) grooved by the edge of the basket/chassis. I think the real diameter is based on the efficient cone+max the half of the felxible edge diameter.
7:32 vs 10:04 is a great comparison. Evo wins for mine. Thanks for the sample. Plenty of reviews with opinions but with good headphones i can hear the difference here. Although i thinkn the KEF's are great the added bass and fullness of the Evo's put it ahead.
Perhaps you can get a sense of it through your headphones any way, but I wonder whether the imaging ability from KEF’s coaxial driver would outweigh the Wharfedale’s dominance with the low end frequencies.
In this test, the Evo 4.2 clinch it for me. The LS50 just cannot compete with the same drama that the Evo's bring. But that is no big surprise, since the Evo's are a bigger box, with three seperate drivers. They sounded bigger, fuller, and just more accomplished than the LS50's. That said, in another test against a pair of Monitor Audio Bronze 2's, the LS50's sounded much more open and forward than the Bronze 2's, especially with vocals and strings. So a more pronounced mid range too, than the Bronze 2's. So all this goes to prove, that you really must listen, and make your own comparisons, before settling on a pair of speakers, because you MAY overlook the ones that got away, the one's that will blow you away when you hear them.
I love to compare a track by its balance between vocal and music.. so i would choose LS50 Meta since the vocal sounds clearly without distracting the hi frequency resonances from the musical.
Such a thorough and well put together video (descriptors and links), much appreciated. Also, I auditioned the Wharfedale Evos in person, and there was something special about them to me. For the price differential, I would definitely go with the Evo 4.2. Your space is sparingly beautiful. I was wondering how does one go about determining whether to use sound panels or not and Where to place them?
except point source thing . Make no mistake on low volume KEF will have razor sharp image , easy to listen and falow . But as SPL goes up problems will start mounting and EVO4.2 will take the top place . But it will not get that razor sharp image due to not being a point source . There is no win win in audio , its a compromise . So best is to have them both
Funny you say that... I heard the 50 Metas with the Rotel 1572 and loved it... but wasn't able to test the 4.2's on the same amp, which was very frustrating lol. Glad to hear you enjoy the combination, as this is what I'm thinking of getting :)
How do you know it's not the room modes? The Evo go lower in frequency and so they can excite room modes that the Kef can't, and room modes reverberate.
I have the regular wired LS50. Some songs sound amazing. Some songs sound thin and weak. I never know which until I play a song. I do have a B&W AS300 sub. Another great review.
Same for me, although for £540 they're a phenomenal speaker and much better (to my ear anyway) then the similarly priced Tannoy floor standers that I previously had. Apparently the Meta's are even better.
thank you for your review. I really have a little fever for that evo 4.2. I have Wharfedale Denton 80th Anniversary and I have been liking them but that Evo is in my mind still.. :)
Hi! I am big wharfedale fan, but now I think the Ls50 is better. The ls50 is liquid, the sound is one unit-at the wharfedale I heard a little hole (maybe cause of cross frequencies at 3 way). The bass is massive and strong at wharfedale but little muddy-this effect makes heavy and unclear the both soundstage. The ls50 is "easy", has good bass but has also living mids and highs. The bass not massing the sound. Good job-good test! Best regards!
I listened to the LS50 Metas as well as the Evo 4.2 and liked the Evos a tad better! I use a pair of KEF LSX for near field while I'm working, for my living room I got myself a pair of Evo 4.3s , they sound simply amazing, especially for the price!
I have a quick compare Evo 4.2 with Kanto Tuk in a same setting. Evo 4.2 has a balance sound, but mid-bass have a bit tail & hum. Totally Kanto Tuk in a smaller shape but it has a amazing sound. Fantastic Bass, and dynamic.
From what I hear through my 6xx, the LS50 Meta seems much more resolving in the lower mids and mids ... They don't go as low but none of these are truly full range. But add a pair of sealed subs and the LS50 Meta system becomes a really thoroughly resolving system without much wholes in the frequency response.
Wharfedales all the way. Better base and a more even sound than the forward, bright sound of the Kefs. I also prefer a warmer sound. I have purchased the 4.2’s and would do the same based on this comparison. Thank you for a great demo.
its the bass. it goes deep and wide. its not earth shaking or screaming for attention. but its everywhere. a lot may like it. some may won't. it does make the music sound fuller and more spread out the room.
The denon pm11 is the bad boy here if you use kef ls50 meta try at least an higher end hegel amp denon pm11 is to warm ive heard them Both just try an hegel amp and you will be thankfull by the way your reviews are Super!!! Great work
The KEFs sound a bit more forwarding, warmer and more pricise in midrange. I like the sound of the KEFs a little better but i would never pay 500$ more. They are way too overpriced. Normal LS50s are on sale for about 600€ all the time here in Germany. 1500$ for the Meta is not a fair deal
So far Denton 80th is better for me (treble a little bit better, bass tonal balance is greater), feel that there is a flaw design to the bass driver of Evo 4.2 (never like phase port, limited elasticity), it's kinda same situation to me there is a flaw tweeter design to Denton 85th & Linton.
@@wim1983 same goes to me. Denton 80th so far serves me well. However different person has different preference. Overall i think Denton is warmer and laid back. Non fatigue.
I bought the old Evo II about 3 or 4 years ago, I got swindled 700 USD for the pair due to lack of research (the new Evo 4 was already out) but I picked it over the new Diamond 10. Anyway I picked it for the warmth smoothness and soundstage, the speaker was not exciting and the imaging was ok but the it makes every bad recording sound good.
Wharfedale are from the UK and have been around for more than 80+ years. I like their speakers, generally understated, and good all-around sound. Not the fanciest stuff, but GOOD quality and GOOD sounding! The are are also reputable for the budget conscience listener.
Hello @Tharbamar! I really appreciate your content. I have a question. I really did appreciate the evos combined with my denon pma2010AE. I just wanted to go up a knotch in the quality of my sound and some people recomended me to get better speakers. So I sold the evos and i still have the same amp. What speakers do you think would bring more value to this amp, above the evos, in the 2k price range? I will mention that I paid around 500$ for the evos in my country. So they aren't as expensive as in the US. Also, I am listening to all kinds of music. I am the kind of person who appreciates the feeling that a song gives you, so I don't have a fav genere, to say so. Thank you and I wish you the best!
If you could, being that both are great speakers, would you keep both speakers in your listening room without having to choose the best of both? One week or month, eg. you would hear the EVOs and then the next week or month the LS50 Metas? Is it a wise choice or a senseless one?
I understand your thoughts, which I do as well but I would suggest you to try just KEF R3 for the better sound, frequency response and power handling, thanks
KEF LS50 is very nice but kinda high in base and sibilance. At first KEF wins but in long listening...I can last better with Wharfedale Evo. Balance...sweet sound, no extra just good sounding, good musicality overall. IMHO.
Just heard the ATC SCM19 v2 bookshelf speakers. Would love to hear your thoughts on those and an audio comparison/sound demo, if you can get your hands them.
Quality wise. I have read multiple reviews, and the people, have mentioned, THE EVO gets a bit cranky, and tone of of the speaker changes over time. What would be your concerns,? I am moving from a B%W 685 set to these. Am I gaining, or losing anything in the process? Thanks for your advice, in advance. > Mark
I can assure you that the Kef’s are not bright at all. I’ve heard lots of very expensive hi end loudspeakers, and they all are as bright or mostly brighter sounding than the Meta’s. And… the Meta’s are very different than the old LS50’s. The original LS50’s are too bright sounding in some songs, not all.
Can you do a comparison between kef r3 and Evo 4.2? I know the let R3 is twice the price but it would be really interesting. As usual the review was very well structured and detailed.
Thanks for the interesting test. The Wharfedale Evo 4.2 has a cleaner sound. The KEF acoustics constantly have a low-frequency hum. Wharfedale is certainly the best.
I am a beginner to this hobby. Maybe because I am nearing my retirement and can now spend more leisure time. I am so attracted to this Evo 4.2 especially with how you described them. I am planning a simple 3.1 setup. It will be for movies and music. What AVR do you suggest with a 3.1 setup on Evo 4.2? Thanks in advance and more power to your channel.
I wonder what would have been the outcome if the Metas had been paired with a Marantz amp. I pair mine with PM12SE a warm sounding amp. The brightness in highs isn’t detectable as much. Metas need very careful pairing choices - powerful and warm sounding. For that I’d give the edge to the Evos since they are much easier to live with (no need of a sub either).
I hear you but you don’t know how PMA-SX11 sound, my main speaker is KEF R11 there is no brightness whatsoever paring with them, Meta is good but not great for everyone sensitive to bright sound, thanks
@@Tharbamar I think the main problem with the Metas is they are hard to drive. They aren’t real 8om speakers. To get good sound out of them, you need an amp doubling or tripling the price. I ended up driving them using my main amp (Diablo 300). They sound much better but then what’s the point?
@@chenqixue8151 Denon PMA-SX11 is more powerful than you may think, it can deliver 240 amp of current when is needed, not many power amps can deliver that kind of current and power rating is way under rated as well.
@@Tharbamar do you recommend spending more than ifi on power cord? My research seems to suggest good shielding is important. Other factors are more a change in tonic characteristics. I’m a little tempted to give high end cables a try but wanted to consult you
Tharbamar, great review as always! Based on your review I bought Evo4.2 and couldn’t be happier! Very well made and sound is great! One thing is bothering me: Regarding the phase plug on the woofer, you said (and show) that it is real phase plug, but on my Evo phase plug is moving with cone!? Can you please investigate, did wharfedale change woofer in recent production of Evo4.2?
Due to a physical implementation, ribbon tweeters like in Evo, work perfect only in a close field. When you sit quite distant, you have to add 5-10dB to them. This is why the best configuration in case of Evo 4.2 would be an active crossover with a gain control, and tri-amping (what I'm going to build soon -)
@@MrSplit57 bi-amping allows to use an amp that matches a speaker at 100% (fr, output impedance, feedback type, gain, etc).. In all cases multi-amping can provide better results than just passive filters. With no exceptions.
These are not ribbon tweeters and don't sound like them either. They are air motion tweeters which is a different implementation. Google to find out more information.
@@richarddavis1025 Thanks. I cannot find any info about drives used with Evo 4.2. And AMT has about the same sound radiation pattern as ribbon tweeters have.
Having heard heard the Evos in person and owning a pair of Klipsch RP 600 in my system, I would say the Evos are a bit more refined and controlled. They are also well balanced across the spectrum. Though I love the Klipsch, there are lively, offer fine stereo separation (excellent product of the price, if not best on market for $400-600 range), but I notice a dip in the midrange on certain music. I can deal with it because the speaker makes me smile in so many other ways. I just feel that a little more went into the build of the Wharfedale Evos, they are elegantly beautiful and the tweeter offers a very different sound from the horn design of the Klipsch.
Hello, just a brief and opinion. When you happen to compare the bass, in a generalized matter you refer to it as merely 'Better bass response', meaning your reference partly based on response graphs. However, this description is about bass is not complete IMO. Attack, speed, articulation and clarity is often overlooked and to me these qualities are priority when choosing a speaker. Maybe an the future I would love to see you describe speakers bass response in these perspectives too. Cheers.
Kef have done a great work whit just one cone speaker.... But the wharfdale have a better more open sound.. Its not fair to judge a 3.way against a 1.way speaker... If want a smal cheaper then is the kef what you go after.. Thanks for the session 👍🙏
At the moment I'm in the middle of auditioning ls50 s and even though there impressive, I don't think I'm able to listen to them for long periods of time (too bright) but to be honest I think I'll end up sending them back because I prefer speakers where I'm able to listen to my music for hours on end!. I enjoyed this video so thanks for posting and by the way your English is better than mine but the funny thing is English is my first language! Lol
@@Cooliewhistles the KEF ls50 originals! If you click on the cat you can actually hear how bright there are especially compared to my other standmounts.....
I have the Evo 4.2. They are a little warmer sounding for all listening in my opinion. I have them paired with a Simaudio moon 240i integrated and they sound killer. I did have them running off my Marantz before i got the moon integrated and sound was too warm. The evo are a more warm sounding speaker. The moon is very natural.
Not many compact speakers can beat KEF's LS50's at their game - if you own your own foundry, you can produce all the exact materials that you need for your engineering - KEF, Rolex and Ferrari have their own foundries.
Thank you for the extremely helpful comparison! The Evo's are top of my shortlist and will most likely replace my JBL Studio 530's. Do you think they will match OK with a hybrid tube based Pre & Power Amp (Pro-Ject Pre Box RS and Amp Box RS)? I'm aware you recommend that the Evo's pair better with a neutral amp but, despite the fact the Pro-Ject Pre & Power Amp are hybrid, I believe they can be fairly neutral / balanced with the right tube selection.
I hope you didn't replace JBL 530 with EVO's no matter how good they seem. JBL are special since their drivers integrate seamlessly. XO is cut at 1500hz which is rare and compression driver of JBL is considered among the best drivers there is since it covers 1500- 40khz which not many can do. EVO's 3 driver array most defenitely leaves a mark on a sound at cut off frequencies of their respectful drivers. I'm struggling to find a better speaker than JBL Studio 530 at reasonable price (sub 5k$).
@@andrejzupan3777 No I haven't. Still looking for what would be a genuine upgrade rather than a sidegrade (or risk of downgrade). The Buchardt speakers have caught my attention.
Not sure if you've gotten new speakers yet. But I just tried out the LS50 Metas, Wharfedale Evo 4.2s, and Elac Unifi Reference in in my home setup (bluesound node 2i -> denafrips pontus II -> parasound p6 -> parasound a23+). I've previously had the JBL studio 570, so I know where you're coming from, I also had the Elac unifi ub5.2. I can say all are upgrades to the 570 (even the UB5.2s) in pretty much every category except for maybe dynamics and max SPL. I liked the warfedales the least. They weren't very engaging and their staging was the least coherent, though better than the 570. They're pretty relaxed sounding and are super finicky to placement and can sound easily the worst out of all the speakers if placed incorrectly (too high up, too close to the wall, not towed in perfectly). However if you're looking for bookshelf speakers that don't need a subwoofer, these are definitely worth considering. I turned my subwoofer off since I couldn't find any music where these speakers didn't play all the way to the bottom satisfactorily. Both Elacs were a step up in overall definition and a HUGE step up in sound stage. The sound stage depth and layering is NUTS. You also get better treble detail without being fatiguing. The reference is a bit more revealing and neutral. The scale of the instruments is the best on these two speakers (sound life size in your room). They are also pretty forgiving to placement. While I loved the Elacs, I kept the LS50 Metas. They don't have the same scale to the instruments and vertical soundstage as the Elacs, but the soundstage depth was the same, the width was better, and the imaging was pinpoint accurate even with full orchestras playing (where all the other speakers got congested and vague). I kept these because they simply sound more engaging than the wharfedale or elac speakers. Something about the transparency and detail, but also how sweet and ever so slightly warm the midrange is. While these don't hit low, they are the only speakers that blend perfectly with my Rythmik L12 and don't excite my rooms bass nodes as the other speakers did (so it sounds like seamless, fast bass down to below 20hz). While they sound great anywhere, to get the best soundstage, I had to play around with placement quite a bit and get them on stands that brought the tweeter to ear level.
@@chadlejeune9834 Hi, thanks for that detailed info! I decided not to go with the Evo's... I haven't changed my speakers yet. I've narrowed my choice down to the LS50 Metas or Dynaudio Evoke 20. My setup has changed so not sure which would pair better. I've now got: Bluesound Node 2i > Musical Paradise MP-D2 Tube DAC > Musical Paradise MP-701 Preamp > KJF Monoblock amps. I'm going to demo the Evoke 20's soon and do a side by side comparison with the JBL's. I expect the Evokes to outperform the JBL's but the glowing reviews of the LS50 Metas are impressive. I might try and find a company who can let me do a home demo. The Metas could work very well for my setup as I also have a sub (linked to the Bluesound) which should compensate for any lacking lowend from the LS50s
@@jmgoodmanuk sounds like either will be a great setup! Have not heard or read up much on the evokes, but I've heard a lot of great things about the company and their products. I'd recommend checking out the channel Pursuit Perfect System. I believe he did a direct comparison between the two (along with many others). I'm not sure if you can order from Crutchfield where you live, but they have a 60 day no-risk, in-home trial period which is how I was able to home demo both the Evos and Metas before choosing.
If you listened to the Scarborough Fair cover and thought the KEFs beat the Wharfedales you don't know what a cello sounds like in real life. The Meta's sound etched, like the audio equivalent of a 80's Xerox copy of a photo. Razor sharp edges, not a lot of natural details.
Kef are absolutly unforgiving, with an oustanding midrange, the treble are well centered and expressive but unfortunelly lacks in bass, is too "flat" imho, at the other hand the evos lacks in midrange, bur both treble and bass are outstanding for the size, and very good for the price.
![SOUND BATTLE - Klipsch RP600M vs Wharfedale EVO 4.2 As Expected?[Sound Comparison] Marantz PM7000N](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/uTwiOCDSWIA/mqdefault.jpg)
The quality and format of your videos are amazing. You’ve obviously put a lot of effort and thought into the presentation. I truly appreciate it.
Thank you.
@@Tharbamar Hello sir, we have the Evo 4.2. suggest us an upgrade around 1500usd of speakers over this please. Thanks
@@Tharbamar How come you find the Evo's sweetspot large when all reviewers and the graphs tell the opposite story, that they beam aggressively above 6kHz? People complain that the sound changes dramatically even when they move their hand a few inches to pick something from the table
I like Wharfedale Evo 4.2 for my taste. Very natural and well blended.
The audio sample recording are worth a million words. Thank you! 💜
I think the fact that a £1000 pair of loudspeakers (KEF) are being compared to a £600 pair of loudspeakers ( Wharfedales) says much more about the Wharfedales than it does about the Kefs. The sonic superiority of the Wharfedales is evident here, but to compound the value on offer just look at them, they are incredible looking, real head turners. Wharfedale are one of several UK loudspeaker companies that have a reputation of offering extremely good products at very competitive prices.
I in general agree with you, but we will need better information about the drivers, and finally, it comes to taste. Also KEF often are very good at low volume.
Thanks you very much for this great and usual Honest review. I follow and watch your video since a while and each time I really enjoy your approach, clear explanation of how speaker sound and above all your true honesty.
Since month I am hesitating by picking up evo 4.2 and recently LS50 old model (since there are actually in discount at 600e)
I just ordered evo 4.2 based on this last video because I see more of my taste will be filled by Evo.
Thanks a lot for your great review and help !
Cedric
The Meta is impressive, but I'll take the Evo. Better balance, less fatiguing for extended listening periods. Can handle louder volumes better as well (as Tharbamar stated).
I on the other hand like the Metas more, and like what they sound very well at. low volume.
Great review, you commented on both of then in a down to earth way. I'll take the Evo's. KEF does exactly what most speaker manufacturers do these days, they throw a massive amount of detail at you forgetting what speakers should be designed for, that is enjoyment of music.
The KEF's might sound better and less boxy in this comparison, that's only because of their sharpness. I used to pick my speakers based on this characteristic but what I found out is that after a week or two of listening to them that amazing detail becomes very fatiguing, taking away the joy and
subtlety in music.
And from this point on I'm rarely motivated to listen to music anymore, which defeats the whole purpose.
Very well put
Exactly what i felt with my ex pair of Kef R3. Very detailed but hard to listen for long periods of time.
Add sub for fucks sake. I mean only idiots can enjoy bookshelfs whitout sub.
this is hard to even understand. have you ever heard an orchestra, opera live? it is the height of detail and is no way fatiguing. why would i want a speaker to diminish the music that's being played on the other end? it's like saying you'd prefer a blurry video so to leave more to the imagination, as if observing the world with your own eyeballs are fatiguing.
do you play an instrument by chance? the difference here sounds like, for example, a cheap guitar vs. a quality handmade guitar.
truth is, Evo just is not a speaker quality enough to reproduce the sounds of live music.
evo sounds like it's in the bottom of a cave ...
Great video, as someone that owns a pair of bright speakers, the Evo 4.2 will be perfect to use for when I am feeling fatigued. Thank you for this video.
The BEST, Evo 4.2. for me.
The 4.2 is one of the best I've heard under $2000
Hello, we have the Evo 4.2/. Would you recommend an upgrade over this ? Around 1500usd please
Bless for your personal apporach and not trying to theorize for the listener. I value the journey and can theorize for myself.
Very accurate and honest review that is useful for potential buyers. Wish more reviewers did this more consumer-oriented review style.
The problem with audio reviews is that speakers and their sound are described with words. Without live listening it's only a road sign a hint.
And after all that it goes to the most important thing that anyone can hear far more than difference between lets say those two speakers and it is room acoustics.
@@thruthspeaker2476 agreed, even good reviews with measurements and comparisons are not perfect methods to decide what to buy, but this review is useful enough that at least the reviewer deserves kudos
Kef’s cases are like concrete, with tight bass and great highs, but above all they are stunning with a powerful warm sounding amp.
Not all KEF cabinets.
@@Tharbamar exactly, I mean the LS50 case
By far the best sound demo videos on the web, Thanx a lot
The vocals on the KEF could have cut glass it was so sharp. I have soon in the game with a pair of EVO 4.2 but I out my money where my mouth is, no regrets especially as I picked them up as ex demo for £350.
The 2nd track Scarborough Fair by Yao Is Ting clearly showed the difference in high frequencies. The Kef Meta is too bright and crisp that makes a fatiguing effect for long listening session. Evo 4.2 managed to present the female voice in a soft and easy to hear sound. Higher resolution and detailing of Kef has its own cons.
The found that the bass in first track is better in Kef Meta because it is more controlled and tighter. Kef has done a brilliant job to deliver lows with such a small cabin. The Evo sounded a little boxy sound, it maybe because I am listening it on RUclips with Audio Technica headphones but Kef sounded better in lows.
I think Evo is a better choice as it is a comparable speaker with meta in all aspects even with different prices. Both have their Ups and downs.
I do not agree. The Kef’s are not fatiguing on the long term at all. But they bring emotion of the singer into the room. That’s what I miss with the Evo’s, they sound good, but they lack the emotion I am looking for in music. For example, listen to the attack of the drum stick on the edge of the snare drum in sample 2. The LS50 has speed and depth in the sound, things I miss at the Evo.
Which is interesting because the frequency response at 0:19 shows the LS50 is actually lower on the high ends (except at the very end).
@@Freedom89984 Ahahaha these overhyped, by mediocre hearing sensed people, KEFs have flat and emotionless vocal
Much prefer the Evo 4.2. Just a fuller more musical sound. Have the Evo 4.4 which are only £200 more than KEF in UK. Really no competition.
I'd pick the LS50! Amazing and complete review. Thanks!
The wharfdales sound better thank you for this demo
You are deaf.
@@next3576 thank you I thought something was wrong with my ears
Wharfedales rule....
@@next3576 my father used to own the ls50 and grew sick of them. The reason is very simple. Driver diversity results in lower distortion. I'm surprised at the compression I can hear on the bottom end.
@@next3576 and you are just an ignorant fanboy. Keep fanning.
KEF is the best sound for me
Wharfedale EVO 4.2 the music embraces you.
KEF LS 50 Meta the music confronts you.
Only a question: why the manufacturers give wrong datas/parameters at new loudspeakers? The evo 4.2 has 150 mm bass driver, not 6,5".The diamond 10.2 has 6,5",yes +just a little bit bigger...🤔
The good old loudspeakers if you read that in catalog at speaker size 8" there was a real 200mm speaker. Why need to cosmetic these datas?
The size is an important thing at woofers/midbass drivers because of the moving air mass.
I know today manufacturing long throw bass units etc with little size but never will be good as a simple old real 8" or 10" bass driver.
6.5 inches is the size of the basket. Wharfedale and a few other manufacturers measure it that way.
@@AbsoluteFidelity This thing reminds me the cheap speakers where the "size"(diameter) grooved by the edge of the basket/chassis.
I think the real diameter is based on the efficient cone+max the half of the felxible edge diameter.
Very close between the two. Really up to preference. Great Review!
7:32 vs 10:04 is a great comparison. Evo wins for mine. Thanks for the sample. Plenty of reviews with opinions but with good headphones i can hear the difference here. Although i thinkn the KEF's are great the added bass and fullness of the Evo's put it ahead.
Perhaps you can get a sense of it through your headphones any way, but I wonder whether the imaging ability from KEF’s coaxial driver would outweigh the Wharfedale’s dominance with the low end frequencies.
In this test, the Evo 4.2 clinch it for me. The LS50 just cannot compete with the same drama that the Evo's bring. But that is no big surprise, since the Evo's are a bigger box, with three seperate drivers. They sounded bigger, fuller, and just more accomplished than the LS50's.
That said, in another test against a pair of Monitor Audio Bronze 2's, the LS50's sounded much more open and forward than the Bronze 2's, especially with vocals and strings. So a more pronounced mid range too, than the Bronze 2's. So all this goes to prove, that you really must listen, and make your own comparisons, before settling on a pair of speakers, because you MAY overlook the ones that got away, the one's that will blow you away when you hear them.
I love to compare a track by its balance between vocal and music.. so i would choose LS50 Meta since the vocal sounds clearly without distracting the hi frequency resonances from the musical.
Such a thorough and well put together video (descriptors and links), much appreciated. Also, I auditioned the Wharfedale Evos in person, and there was something special about them to me. For the price differential, I would definitely go with the Evo 4.2. Your space is sparingly beautiful. I was wondering how does one go about determining whether to use sound panels or not and Where to place them?
Evo 4.2 has it going on in every way.
Another 👍👍review
except point source thing . Make no mistake on low volume KEF will have razor sharp image , easy to listen and falow .
But as SPL goes up problems will start mounting and EVO4.2 will take the top place .
But it will not get that razor sharp image due to not being a point source .
There is no win win in audio , its a compromise .
So best is to have them both
Thanks so much for your superb review. LS50 meta would be my choice. Very nice demo too.
I have the 4.2’s paired with a Rotel 1572 and blue sound node 2i. I couldn’t be a more happy.
Funny you say that... I heard the 50 Metas with the Rotel 1572 and loved it... but wasn't able to test the 4.2's on the same amp, which was very frustrating lol. Glad to hear you enjoy the combination, as this is what I'm thinking of getting :)
@@yewfh-oz7in I recently purchased the Loxjie DAC and it’s an absolutely amazing combination.
This time Kef produced well define bass while Evo produced over hang bass full of resonance! It was so surprised!
How do you know it's not the room modes? The Evo go lower in frequency and so they can excite room modes that the Kef can't, and room modes reverberate.
I have the regular wired LS50. Some songs sound amazing. Some songs sound thin and weak. I never know which until I play a song. I do have a B&W AS300 sub. Another great review.
Same for me, although for £540 they're a phenomenal speaker and much better (to my ear anyway) then the similarly priced Tannoy floor standers that I previously had. Apparently the Meta's are even better.
That's the recording for you they ars not all equal unfortunately. I'm not a fan of the ls50 to me they are boom boxes .
@@justinparkman3585 That's an absurd statement. My LS50's with my two REL T5i' subs sound superb. A true full range sound.
@@andrewcopley6454 that's OK till you hear something from the likes of ATC
The kef sounds lucious... Appreciate the effort u put in....👍
thank you for your review. I really have a little fever for that evo 4.2. I have Wharfedale Denton 80th Anniversary and I have been liking them but that Evo is in my mind still.. :)
Hi! I am big wharfedale fan, but now I think the Ls50 is better.
The ls50 is liquid, the sound is one unit-at the wharfedale I heard a little hole (maybe cause of cross frequencies at 3 way).
The bass is massive and strong at wharfedale but little muddy-this effect makes heavy and unclear the both soundstage.
The ls50 is "easy", has good bass but has also living mids and highs. The bass not massing the sound.
Good job-good test! Best regards!
I listened to the LS50 Metas as well as the Evo 4.2 and liked the Evos a tad better! I use a pair of KEF LSX for near field while I'm working, for my living room I got myself a pair of Evo 4.3s , they sound simply amazing, especially for the price!
I have a quick compare Evo 4.2 with Kanto Tuk in a same setting. Evo 4.2 has a balance sound, but mid-bass have a bit tail & hum. Totally Kanto Tuk in a smaller shape but it has a amazing sound. Fantastic Bass, and dynamic.
The Evo 4.2 sweet sounding and balance.
Hello, where can we find these very pretty acoustic panels ? Please 👋
KEF R3 Vs Wharfedale Evo 4.2 ?
The EVO has better clarity but needs another woofer to help out.
Your videos are awesome. No begging people, just good info.
Great review, thank you! How far from the back wall do the Evos have to be? thanks!
If I remember it right it’s about a little over 3ft, thanks
The KEF sounds more forward sounding to my ears. I just ordered the Wharfdale Evo 4.2's. Can't wait to hear them. Thanks for your all your reviews
Kinda prefer the KEFs actually for it's better highs and airier sounding + well defined bass
From what I hear through my 6xx, the LS50 Meta seems much more resolving in the lower mids and mids ... They don't go as low but none of these are truly full range.
But add a pair of sealed subs and the LS50 Meta system becomes a really thoroughly resolving system without much wholes in the frequency response.
Exactly what I was thinking.
I think they are both crap ! They would drive me nuts !
You don't want to mix vented and sealed due to phase incoherence
@@r423fplip well when I heard the female voice it was over for me, both have sibilance problems
Wharfedales all the way. Better base and a more even sound than the forward, bright sound of the Kefs. I also prefer a warmer sound. I have purchased the 4.2’s and would do the same based on this comparison. Thank you for a great demo.
The meta aren't forward like the original ls50, a coaxial arrangement also sounds more natural in my opinion.
How the hell hard is it to spell "bass" for you idiots?
The Wharfdale just sounds a little veiled. RUclips demos just can’t highlight what these can do in person 🎶🔊.
I agree. Based on this comparison I'd say the KEF's are more detailed.
its the bass. it goes deep and wide. its not earth shaking or screaming for attention. but its everywhere. a lot may like it. some may won't. it does make the music sound fuller and more spread out the room.
Veiled... on the 4.2... thats a good one... Lmfao!!!
The denon pm11 is the bad boy here if you use kef ls50 meta try at least an higher end hegel amp denon pm11 is to warm ive heard them Both just try an hegel amp and you will be thankfull by the way your reviews are Super!!! Great work
I tried Hegel H590 before SX11 and it don’t impress me to be honest, cheaply made quality with ok sound for the price.
The KEFs sound a bit more forwarding, warmer and more pricise in midrange. I like the sound of the KEFs a little better but i would never pay 500$ more.
They are way too overpriced. Normal LS50s are on sale for about 600€ all the time here in Germany. 1500$ for the Meta is not a fair deal
Totally agree.
600€ all the time? WHERE exactly?
@@Rebel5406 Actually not exactly 600€ but for 666€ all the time but they are often at sale
you can say your clothes are over priced. your 20 dollar t shirt cost what? like 1 dollar to make...
KEF all made in China nowadays
Love the new amp ! Big improvement over previous amps.
Evo more balanced sound from top to bottom. Would not be fatigued as quickly.
Wharfedale great speakers and for the people that want good music quality at a affordable price without costing the earth
Well said. Thanks
The Evo made my TV shake with bass and sounded better. 😁😉
Evo 4.2 are in my short list. I am torn between them or Dentons, modern vs classical look, tips are welcomed.
So far Denton 80th is better for me (treble a little bit better, bass tonal balance is greater), feel that there is a flaw design to the bass driver of Evo 4.2 (never like phase port, limited elasticity), it's kinda same situation to me there is a flaw tweeter design to Denton 85th & Linton.
@@wim1983 same goes to me. Denton 80th so far serves me well. However different person has different preference. Overall i think Denton is warmer and laid back. Non fatigue.
I bought the old Evo II about 3 or 4 years ago, I got swindled 700 USD for the pair due to lack of research (the new Evo 4 was already out) but I picked it over the new Diamond 10. Anyway I picked it for the warmth smoothness and soundstage, the speaker was not exciting and the imaging was ok but the it makes every bad recording sound good.
Never heard Wharfedale before, but speak they have. These are as good as they are acclaimed to be.
Wharfedale are from the UK and have been around for more than 80+ years. I like their speakers, generally understated, and good all-around sound. Not the fanciest stuff, but GOOD quality and GOOD sounding! The are are also reputable for the budget conscience listener.
Hello @Tharbamar! I really appreciate your content. I have a question. I really did appreciate the evos combined with my denon pma2010AE. I just wanted to go up a knotch in the quality of my sound and some people recomended me to get better speakers. So I sold the evos and i still have the same amp. What speakers do you think would bring more value to this amp, above the evos, in the 2k price range? I will mention that I paid around 500$ for the evos in my country. So they aren't as expensive as in the US. Also, I am listening to all kinds of music. I am the kind of person who appreciates the feeling that a song gives you, so I don't have a fav genere, to say so. Thank you and I wish you the best!
I would suggest you to try B&W 706 S3/705 S2, KEF R3 Meta or R3 and KLH Model 3 should pair well with the amplifier you have, thanks
@@Tharbamar If i could get the r7 for 2k, you would recomend them over the metas? I have the space for them.
Sure Meta is just slightly better in details.
Great video! Thanks for taking the time to do all of this work. Where would the Klipsch RP600-M fair in all of this?
Why is the video cutting off at 12:26? =\
I had to cut the end part due to copyright issues.
If you could, being that both are great speakers, would you keep both speakers in your listening room without having to choose the best of both? One week or month, eg. you would hear the EVOs and then the next week or month the LS50 Metas? Is it a wise choice or a senseless one?
I understand your thoughts, which I do as well but I would suggest you to try just KEF R3 for the better sound, frequency response and power handling, thanks
If you are going have a speaker stand and use it as your mains might as well have towers
I have too many speakers, please see my latest video, thanks
KEF LS50 is very nice but kinda high in base and sibilance. At first KEF wins but in long listening...I can last better with Wharfedale Evo. Balance...sweet sound, no extra just good sounding, good musicality overall. IMHO.
Just heard the ATC SCM19 v2 bookshelf speakers. Would love to hear your thoughts on those and an audio comparison/sound demo, if you can get your hands them.
Were they amazing? For 4k a pair they better be close
At first it was the KEFs for me, but after a few back and forths the Wharfdales took it for me.
Quality wise. I have read multiple reviews, and the people, have mentioned, THE EVO gets a bit cranky, and tone of of the speaker changes over time. What would be your concerns,? I am moving from a B%W 685 set to these. Am I gaining, or losing anything in the process? Thanks for your advice, in advance. > Mark
Here is better buy
Marvelous Polk Audio Reserve R200 Speaker Review
ruclips.net/video/Ikw8a49hvgw/видео.html
KEF R3 vs Wharfedale EVO 4.2 if you can in the future. That would be interesting.
I waiting for R3 Meta as it will have more bass than LS50
@@kevinweber5129 me too was already a 5 star giant killer at 2k
@@kevinweber5129 are there really any plans to realese the KEF R3 metas?
@@kevinweber5129 it already does
The LS50 Meta can sound awfully bright to me. The Evo 4.2 sound warmer and more balanced.
I can assure you that the Kef’s are not bright at all. I’ve heard lots of very expensive hi end loudspeakers, and they all are as bright or mostly brighter sounding than the Meta’s.
And… the Meta’s are very different than the old LS50’s. The original LS50’s are too bright sounding in some songs, not all.
What is the color name and brand of that green wall you have behind?
I'll take the KEF's. Thank you.
Great review Tharbamar!!what's your opinion about Mission's loudspeakers?specially TVE QX-2??? Thanks!
Which is good sound comes in gaming-watching movies-listening rock music and r&b songs?✌️
ls50 meta check 16:28 and 18:41
Can you do a comparison between kef r3 and Evo 4.2? I know the let R3 is twice the price but it would be really interesting. As usual the review was very well structured and detailed.
Price doesn't control quality of sound. Technology does. The ribbon beats all conventional tweeters
Kef R3 have no bass. Evo 4.2 too
Thanks for the interesting test. The Wharfedale Evo 4.2 has a cleaner sound. The KEF acoustics constantly have a low-frequency hum. Wharfedale is certainly the best.
The ls50's definitely got that punch down over the warfdale. At least in this medium.
Nice choice of tracks very clear differences thanks
I’m on the KEF train. I think if you pair them with a nice sub it would be damn near perfect for me
kef kc62 for looks and sound
@@stanleysmith3706 it does look nice but I have like a 30 x 20 room with vaulted ceilings so I fear it’s too small for my space
@@pmizz7959 than both of these bookshelf speaker is also too small for ur space
@@stanleysmith3706 doesn’t feel that way when I am listening to them. Oh well. It’s what I got now. Happy with them
@@pmizz7959 i am still listening to a very old a pair of b&w 602 s3 so you ahve better ,newer gears than me
in P1 the Kef`s bass it`s out of this world. evo -1
Focal Aria 906 is a better deal and sound better than both in my opinion.
I am a beginner to this hobby. Maybe because I am nearing my retirement and can now spend more leisure time. I am so attracted to this Evo 4.2 especially with how you described them. I am planning a simple 3.1 setup. It will be for movies and music. What AVR do you suggest with a 3.1 setup on Evo 4.2? Thanks in advance and more power to your channel.
I would try something from Yamaha or Denon to pair with Evo series, thank you.
I wonder what would have been the outcome if the Metas had been paired with a Marantz amp. I pair mine with PM12SE a warm sounding amp. The brightness in highs isn’t detectable as much. Metas need very careful pairing choices - powerful and warm sounding. For that I’d give the edge to the Evos since they are much easier to live with (no need of a sub either).
I hear you but you don’t know how PMA-SX11 sound, my main speaker is KEF R11 there is no brightness whatsoever paring with them, Meta is good but not great for everyone sensitive to bright sound, thanks
@@Tharbamar I think the main problem with the Metas is they are hard to drive. They aren’t real 8om speakers. To get good sound out of them, you need an amp doubling or tripling the price. I ended up driving them using my main amp (Diablo 300). They sound much better but then what’s the point?
@@chenqixue8151 Denon PMA-SX11 is more powerful than you may think, it can deliver 240 amp of current when is needed, not many power amps can deliver that kind of current and power rating is way under rated as well.
@@Tharbamar do you recommend spending more than ifi on power cord? My research seems to suggest good shielding is important. Other factors are more a change in tonic characteristics. I’m a little tempted to give high end cables a try but wanted to consult you
Evo4.2 has deeper base due to physical stuff.
Well said
Tharbamar, great review as always! Based on your review I bought Evo4.2 and couldn’t be happier! Very well made and sound is great! One thing is bothering me: Regarding the phase plug on the woofer, you said (and show) that it is real phase plug, but on my Evo phase plug is moving with cone!? Can you please investigate, did wharfedale change woofer in recent production of Evo4.2?
Your question is only Whatfedale can answer, thanks
Same here. The cone is moving.
TopMotor Revolution Good! Not that I’m complaining - I’m just curious! More than satisfy with performance of Evo 4.2
Yes they did change them, they found a few more Hz depth by coupling the cone to the diaphragm and allowing freer movement
have you ever heard revel m16
did you bolt your met to the stands using the available inserts? This has a dramatic impact upon the SQ of the LS50 Meta.
Due to a physical implementation, ribbon tweeters like in Evo, work perfect only in a close field. When you sit quite distant, you have to add 5-10dB to them. This is why the best configuration in case of Evo 4.2 would be an active crossover with a gain control, and tri-amping (what I'm going to build soon -)
sc0or whould bi-amping help anything for the amt tweeter?
@@MrSplit57 bi-amping allows to use an amp that matches a speaker at 100% (fr, output impedance, feedback type, gain, etc).. In all cases multi-amping can provide better results than just passive filters. With no exceptions.
Funny. I was thinking along those lines. If Wharfedale decided to builf something like the Burchardt 500 they have all the parts.
These are not ribbon tweeters and don't sound like them either. They are air motion tweeters which is a different implementation. Google to find out more information.
@@richarddavis1025 Thanks. I cannot find any info about drives used with Evo 4.2. And AMT has about the same sound radiation pattern as ribbon tweeters have.
Are you recomend evo 4.s for surround speaker? Or better I buy SVS ultra surround?
Did the reviewer or anyone else listen to the Evo 4.2 bi-wiring connected? Then what are the pros and cons compared to single wire connection?
I would like to pair the evo’s with klipsch RP 600.
Having heard heard the Evos in person and owning a pair of Klipsch RP 600 in my system, I would say the Evos are a bit more refined and controlled. They are also well balanced across the spectrum. Though I love the Klipsch, there are lively, offer fine stereo separation (excellent product of the price, if not best on market for $400-600 range), but I notice a dip in the midrange on certain music. I can deal with it because the speaker makes me smile in so many other ways. I just feel that a little more went into the build of the Wharfedale Evos, they are elegantly beautiful and the tweeter offers a very different sound from the horn design of the Klipsch.
Just get Wharfedale 9.1's and save a whole load of money -- and also get a fantastically good set of speakers! :0)
Hello, just a brief and opinion. When you happen to compare the bass, in a generalized matter you refer to it as merely 'Better bass response', meaning your reference partly based on response graphs. However, this description is about bass is not complete IMO. Attack, speed, articulation and clarity is often overlooked and to me these qualities are priority when choosing a speaker. Maybe an the future I would love to see you describe speakers bass response in these perspectives too. Cheers.
Kef have done a great work whit just one cone speaker.... But the wharfdale have a better more open sound.. Its not fair to judge a 3.way against a 1.way speaker... If want a smal cheaper then is the kef what you go after.. Thanks for the session 👍🙏
KEF is Two way speaker.
At the moment I'm in the middle of auditioning ls50 s and even though there impressive, I don't think I'm able to listen to them for long periods of time (too bright) but to be honest I think I'll end up sending them back because I prefer speakers where I'm able to listen to my music for hours on end!. I enjoyed this video so thanks for posting and by the way your English is better than mine but the funny thing is English is my first language! Lol
i hear that, evo better since not fatiguing
Do you have the original or meta ??
@@Cooliewhistles the KEF ls50 originals! If you click on the cat you can actually hear how bright there are especially compared to my other standmounts.....
I have the Evo 4.2. They are a little warmer sounding for all listening in my opinion. I have them paired with a Simaudio moon 240i integrated and they sound killer. I did have them running off my Marantz before i got the moon integrated and sound was too warm. The evo are a more warm sounding speaker. The moon is very natural.
Not many compact speakers can beat KEF's LS50's at their game - if you own your own foundry, you can produce all the exact materials that you need for your engineering - KEF, Rolex and Ferrari have their own foundries.
Bowers and wilkins and Revel, just to name two.
Is the Elysian worth the extra money?
Which do you think is a better match for Rotel A-11 ?
Thank you for the extremely helpful comparison!
The Evo's are top of my shortlist and will most likely replace my JBL Studio 530's.
Do you think they will match OK with a hybrid tube based Pre & Power Amp (Pro-Ject Pre Box RS and Amp Box RS)? I'm aware you recommend that the Evo's pair better with a neutral amp but, despite the fact the Pro-Ject Pre & Power Amp are hybrid, I believe they can be fairly neutral / balanced with the right tube selection.
I hope you didn't replace JBL 530 with EVO's no matter how good they seem. JBL are special since their drivers integrate seamlessly. XO is cut at 1500hz which is rare and compression driver of JBL is considered among the best drivers there is since it covers 1500- 40khz which not many can do. EVO's 3 driver array most defenitely leaves a mark on a sound at cut off frequencies of their respectful drivers. I'm struggling to find a better speaker than JBL Studio 530 at reasonable price (sub 5k$).
@@andrejzupan3777 No I haven't. Still looking for what would be a genuine upgrade rather than a sidegrade (or risk of downgrade). The Buchardt speakers have caught my attention.
Not sure if you've gotten new speakers yet. But I just tried out the LS50 Metas, Wharfedale Evo 4.2s, and Elac Unifi Reference in in my home setup (bluesound node 2i -> denafrips pontus II -> parasound p6 -> parasound a23+). I've previously had the JBL studio 570, so I know where you're coming from, I also had the Elac unifi ub5.2. I can say all are upgrades to the 570 (even the UB5.2s) in pretty much every category except for maybe dynamics and max SPL.
I liked the warfedales the least. They weren't very engaging and their staging was the least coherent, though better than the 570. They're pretty relaxed sounding and are super finicky to placement and can sound easily the worst out of all the speakers if placed incorrectly (too high up, too close to the wall, not towed in perfectly). However if you're looking for bookshelf speakers that don't need a subwoofer, these are definitely worth considering. I turned my subwoofer off since I couldn't find any music where these speakers didn't play all the way to the bottom satisfactorily.
Both Elacs were a step up in overall definition and a HUGE step up in sound stage. The sound stage depth and layering is NUTS. You also get better treble detail without being fatiguing. The reference is a bit more revealing and neutral. The scale of the instruments is the best on these two speakers (sound life size in your room). They are also pretty forgiving to placement.
While I loved the Elacs, I kept the LS50 Metas. They don't have the same scale to the instruments and vertical soundstage as the Elacs, but the soundstage depth was the same, the width was better, and the imaging was pinpoint accurate even with full orchestras playing (where all the other speakers got congested and vague). I kept these because they simply sound more engaging than the wharfedale or elac speakers. Something about the transparency and detail, but also how sweet and ever so slightly warm the midrange is. While these don't hit low, they are the only speakers that blend perfectly with my Rythmik L12 and don't excite my rooms bass nodes as the other speakers did (so it sounds like seamless, fast bass down to below 20hz). While they sound great anywhere, to get the best soundstage, I had to play around with placement quite a bit and get them on stands that brought the tweeter to ear level.
@@chadlejeune9834 Hi, thanks for that detailed info! I decided not to go with the Evo's... I haven't changed my speakers yet. I've narrowed my choice down to the LS50 Metas or Dynaudio Evoke 20.
My setup has changed so not sure which would pair better. I've now got: Bluesound Node 2i > Musical Paradise MP-D2 Tube DAC > Musical Paradise MP-701 Preamp > KJF Monoblock amps.
I'm going to demo the Evoke 20's soon and do a side by side comparison with the JBL's. I expect the Evokes to outperform the JBL's but the glowing reviews of the LS50 Metas are impressive. I might try and find a company who can let me do a home demo. The Metas could work very well for my setup as I also have a sub (linked to the Bluesound) which should compensate for any lacking lowend from the LS50s
@@jmgoodmanuk sounds like either will be a great setup! Have not heard or read up much on the evokes, but I've heard a lot of great things about the company and their products. I'd recommend checking out the channel Pursuit Perfect System. I believe he did a direct comparison between the two (along with many others). I'm not sure if you can order from Crutchfield where you live, but they have a 60 day no-risk, in-home trial period which is how I was able to home demo both the Evos and Metas before choosing.
If you listened to the Scarborough Fair cover and thought the KEFs beat the Wharfedales you don't know what a cello sounds like in real life. The Meta's sound etched, like the audio equivalent of a 80's Xerox copy of a photo. Razor sharp edges, not a lot of natural details.
LOL you don’t even know me and said I don’t know how cello sound in real life. Hey thanks for sharing your experience.
Kef are absolutly unforgiving, with an oustanding midrange, the treble are well centered and expressive but unfortunelly lacks in bass, is too "flat" imho, at the other hand the evos lacks in midrange, bur both treble and bass are outstanding for the size, and very good for the price.