Have heard both in the flesh. Both excellent. For me the Kef’s in direct comparison are better analytically but lack the natural musicality of the AE’s. Obviously completely subjective but to me the AE’s have a bit more weight and sound more natural. As with all things, it comes down to what you value most in sound signature
I opine AE500 suitable for slow music like Jazz, Classical etc warm sound. Kef is fast and dynamic. Compare between 3:06 and 4:14, the mid range of AE500 is muddy when playing fast music... personally I prefer AE500 for warm sound 😊
The LS50 Metas are indeed great speakers but they are also somewhat analytical. This becomes most apparent during the final track being played. In my opinion the midrange of the AE500 is less harsh and has much more tonality and musicality. Although very good the highs in the LS50'S somewhat distract from the midrange in the last track as if they're trying to compensate.
I like them both, and already own the KEF's. In this demo the kef's sound more closed in, and I notice that at my house as well. I really would like to own a pair of ae500's. Maybe some day I will. All of those out there who say the kef have no bass, and too much tweeter must be using bad equipment. I would really like to hear an ae300 vs ae500 comparison to see how much better the ae500 might be !
Seems like there are lots if ls50 meta haters out here that have probably never even heard these speakers themselves in person. I cant coment on AE500 however i have heard its a good speaker. I own the ls50 Meta's and these negative comments are almost laughable, Hollow, thin, tiny, dynamically flat.... really?🤔
Sounds like you're butt hurt that the LS50s were beaten by a less expensive speaker. And everyone knows that the LS50s do lack bass. It's the most common complaint about them.
I want to hear the AE in person. The KEF LS50 metas are great too. I went Sonus Faber Lumina 2 over the kef, but the AE keeps getting rave reviews. Plus I just like hearing other systems.
Heard the AE's at an audio show and the sound signature wowed me. Also spoke to one of the engineers and the way he described the company's philosophy prompted me to buy a pair on the spot. Haven't looked back since. DAMN, there are SO MANY good speakers out there!!
AE500 is smoother in the highs. Warmer mids. Bass is deeper. LS50 meta is crispier in the highs. Vocal is neutral. Bass is punchier n taut. In comparison. AE500 sounded more polite n restrained on some tracks. LS50 meta is more open n livelier. Both are great speakers. It boils down to system synergy and matching to our own taste for music we like. I have the LS50 myself. Drive it will the right powerful amplifier n take time to position them. The sonic reward is huge.
two acoustic systems are good, kef plays cleaner and more analytically, AE is deeper, there is a body in the middle but dirtier in the upper frequencies... AE will be good for different rock genres, kef is more universal... when choosing, it’s a matter of everyone’s taste person...
When I listen to Rampampam on my Genelec’s I hear this beautiful rumbling noise down at 30 Hz which is completely missing here. Low bass is not present in either of these speakers . Getting a subwoofer not so easy. Good bass is hard to achieve whereas higher frequencies more easier
30Hz in a bookshelf speaker? How long have you been in the audio game? Less than 5% can make it into the high 30s, including active studio monitors, and I’m not talking about ones that cost $15-$20K.
Your not supposed to toe KEF's in the waveguide is only supposed to be audible for close up tests. The way they really tune their sound is off the flare which now encompasses the entire diaphragm. They used to have a Theil like outer ring to serve the same purpose.
AE’s definitely warmer, less fatiguing (?), KEF’s more ‘party-ish’. Both excellent transducers depending on what your tastes are. I figure l can compensate with silver cabling.
Agreed, but Kef 50LS has better coherence and better balance. Take your pick it is all boiled down to your tastes, both are very good speakers. One thing I know, your ears and brain combo are smarter than you think, after a while, you are tired of the speakers you own and you want to change.
@@garsonamai4528 I heard sound reverberation from the sound recorded, your room is not treated and too much equipment lying around, room treatment will greatly improve the sound you record and also the music you will enjoy yourselves, live.
Kef tutta la vita! Bell suono anche delle acustic !il problema è l'emissine ... Nelle kef essendo.cossiali il suono è ben centrato e godibile mentre nelle acustic non avendo gli speaker con emissione allineata ,sono molto sfasati e pur suonado bene all'ascolto risultano.leggermente confuse
The audio quality of the video isn’t good enough to make a comparison between the two speakers. Very amused by the comments claiming one sounds better than the other based on a video.
Well, there is a difference in the sound, can't you hear it? As far as I'm concerned, the setup is identical and the difference is in the speakers, making it very possible to judge it.
KEF is better in terms of legibility and delineation of sound. However, AE better tonal balance. AE has a better lower middle. KEF is a little too much for me.
You can't come to any conclusion on sound with a video like this considering it's RUclips, influences of the mic, 6+ pairs of speakers in the room plus your own speakers or headphones you're listening with. The only thing you can possibly judge here are aesthetics. In this case, for me, Acoustic Energy AE500 for the win on their matching stands.
Theres always that guy on these threads...so you couldnt tell the difference between a Klipsch and pair of B&W over youtube? You must have really shitty hearing.
I am having now for first time ls50 meta for try in my setup and I have really problem tom get tht somebody says they are analitical. What I hear is aabsolutely great reproduction of musical instruments without any color, ...just like the instrument really sounds. Paired with cambridge axa35,....with naim xs2 it is not good pairing.
@@janulik9535 LS 50 has a reputation for being a little power hungry. I have an AXA 35 as well. Great amp, but at 35 watts I don't think you will get the best the LS 50's can offer. I am not surprised you added the disclaimer.
@yyl1060 the disclaimer was not adressed to axa35 but to xs2. Dispite kef ls50 meta having reputation of being power hungry and minimum recomended power of the amplifier is 40 per channel into 8 ohm, axa35 is handling them well. Of course there is difference if you use stronger amplification but there are many stronger amplifiers per claimed wattage number which will not handle them as axa35 for sure. That was the point of my oreginal coment.
@@janulik9535 Understood. I am not knocking the Cambridge. As I say I own one and I think it is a great amp for the money. Just saying there are times when certain amp/speaker combinations don't always combine well. It's good that you are happy with yours and enjoy your listening!
@@boneseyyl1060 thx for the reply, yes I agree, I prefer much xs2 not surprisingly, but axa35 is an kick ass for 350 bucks :) off course loud volumes are not a considaration here
Here you go. All the songs +1 extra. Not the best quality, maybe the mic is too close, but I hope you'll like it ruclips.net/video/jF0fYlfkdX8/видео.html
Both very good speakers, but different price range and different quality. KEFs are much more detailed and the bass is faster and tighter. They also have better soundstage. But ELACs have better price/quality ratio I would say. Sound is natural, well balanced, a bit warmer than KEF. Also, worth noting that KEFs require a very good amplification to get the best out of them.
Kef is much more neutral more accurate better imaging outher speaker has a boosted upper octave witch to to the untrained ear would seem more detailed but put it in a normal room and it will become very fatigued sounding fast same old tricks to sell speakers of lower quality many people enjoy distortion its your money
@@garsonamai4528 They are objectively good speakers. For me they were just no fun to listen to at all. Dynamically flat with a one note bass. I tried to like them, but they're just not for me.
I would say they sound thinner but not "tinny". That describes high frequency sibilance to me, which I did not hear from the Kef. I found the AE500 to have a boomy sound to it, but you would probably describe it as "fuller". I think the tonal accuracy of the Kef is hands down better. In the case of these two speakers I would find listening to the Kef to be less fatiguing to my ear. The boominess and warm sound of the 500 I find to be a bit overpowering. If I was listening to the 500's I would probably play them at slightly lower volumes than the Kefs to enjoy the warm sound.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Have heard both in the flesh. Both excellent. For me the Kef’s in direct comparison are better analytically but lack the natural musicality of the AE’s. Obviously completely subjective but to me the AE’s have a bit more weight and sound more natural. As with all things, it comes down to what you value most in sound signature
Metas sibilent but more transparent. The AE has that warmer sound for longer listening. Both nice. I'll take the AE's for that reason.
Nah
2:12 vs 3:31
4:56 vs 6:19
5:29 vs 6:52
7:25 vs 8:29
I opine AE500 suitable for slow music like Jazz, Classical etc warm sound. Kef is fast and dynamic. Compare between 3:06 and 4:14, the mid range of AE500 is muddy when playing fast music... personally I prefer AE500 for warm sound 😊
The LS50 Metas are indeed great speakers but they are also somewhat analytical. This becomes most apparent during the final track being played. In my opinion the midrange of the AE500 is less harsh and has much more tonality and musicality. Although very good the highs in the LS50'S somewhat distract from the midrange in the last track as if they're trying to compensate.
I like them both, and already own the KEF's. In this demo the kef's sound more closed in, and I notice that at my house as well. I really would like to own a pair of ae500's. Maybe some day I will. All of those out there who say the kef have no bass, and too much tweeter must be using bad equipment. I would really like to hear an ae300 vs ae500 comparison to see how much better the ae500 might be !
AE500 sound great - very impressive. Better midrange and dynamics.... more "alive".
Yes what your not hearing over youtube is the discoloration the Ae's have... Especially against the Kef. But the Ae's do have the better midrange...
@@Zenos174 They sound somewhat unnatural, quite "HI-Fi. But still great...
AE500 win for me. I own AE1 Active so for me AE sounds much familiar
Hearing the. Room more than anything else
Seems like there are lots if ls50 meta haters out here that have probably never even heard these speakers themselves in person.
I cant coment on AE500 however i have heard its a good speaker.
I own the ls50 Meta's and these negative comments are almost laughable, Hollow, thin, tiny, dynamically flat.... really?🤔
I never really connected with my LS50s, until I ran them with tubes. Then everything fell into place.
Sounds like you're butt hurt that the LS50s were beaten by a less expensive speaker. And everyone knows that the LS50s do lack bass. It's the most common complaint about them.
On here the acoustics win by a mile, for me.
The amp is very good..
Acoustic Energy AE500 are deep
I want to hear the AE in person. The KEF LS50 metas are great too. I went Sonus Faber Lumina 2 over the kef, but the AE keeps getting rave reviews. Plus I just like hearing other systems.
Heard the AE's at an audio show and the sound signature wowed me.
Also spoke to one of the engineers and the way he described the company's philosophy prompted me to buy a pair on the spot.
Haven't looked back since. DAMN, there are SO MANY good speakers out there!!
AE500 is smoother in the highs. Warmer mids. Bass is deeper.
LS50 meta is crispier in the highs. Vocal is neutral. Bass is punchier n taut.
In comparison.
AE500 sounded more polite n restrained on some tracks.
LS50 meta is more open n livelier.
Both are great speakers.
It boils down to system synergy and matching to our own taste for music we like.
I have the LS50 myself.
Drive it will the right powerful amplifier n take time to position them. The sonic reward is huge.
Both are excellence.AE500 warmer in midrange but LS50 more transparent.
I agree with that.
@@garsonamai4528 Great review.Thanks.
I noticed the same! I tend more toward transparency; therefore, my choice here would be the KEF.
Both sound good however i am listening to this on the ls50's
two acoustic systems are good, kef plays cleaner and more analytically, AE is deeper, there is a body in the middle but dirtier in the upper frequencies... AE will be good for different rock genres, kef is more universal... when choosing, it’s a matter of everyone’s taste person...
The kef speakers are slightly more crisper in the high frequency, but I like the sound of the acoustic energy speakers.
When I listen to Rampampam on my Genelec’s I hear this beautiful rumbling noise down at 30 Hz which is completely missing here. Low bass is not present in either of these speakers . Getting a subwoofer not so easy. Good bass is hard to achieve whereas higher frequencies more easier
Lol, which Genelecs do you have? You know, not all Genelecs either produce 30Hz, plus you need a big room too to reach it.
@@JauzaFIN 8351B
30Hz in a bookshelf speaker? How long have you been in the audio game? Less than 5% can make it into the high 30s, including active studio monitors, and I’m not talking about ones that cost $15-$20K.
AE500 all day long 😉👂
Your not supposed to toe KEF's in the waveguide is only supposed to be audible for close up tests. The way they really tune their sound is off the flare which now encompasses the entire diaphragm. They used to have a Theil like outer ring to serve the same purpose.
Try toeing the kefs straight like everyone else does
AE’s definitely warmer, less fatiguing (?), KEF’s more ‘party-ish’. Both excellent transducers depending on what your tastes are. I figure l can compensate with silver cabling.
kef seems to have more layers/depth to sound?
Acoustic Energy AE500 Better resolution
I can agree with that. Also they have richer midrange in my opinion.
Agreed, but Kef 50LS has better coherence and better balance. Take your pick it is all boiled down to your tastes, both are very good speakers. One thing I know, your ears and brain combo are smarter than you think, after a while, you are tired of the speakers you own and you want to change.
@@garsonamai4528 BTW not perfect but good demo.
@@yttean98 thanks! What do you think I should improve? Sound quality? Content?
@@garsonamai4528 I heard sound reverberation from the sound recorded, your room is not treated and too much equipment lying around, room treatment will greatly improve the sound you record and also the music you will enjoy yourselves, live.
KEF is more balanced, detailed, and natural. The AE has bloated midrange
That's what EQ's are for!
Kef tutta la vita! Bell suono anche delle acustic !il problema è l'emissine ... Nelle kef essendo.cossiali il suono è ben centrato e godibile mentre nelle acustic non avendo gli speaker con emissione allineata ,sono molto sfasati e pur suonado bene all'ascolto risultano.leggermente confuse
astounding vocal reproduction out of the metas, wow
LOL
LS50 well balanced but for someone with a 4 year old kid I will get the 500 for its grills
The audio quality of the video isn’t good enough to make a comparison between the two speakers. Very amused by the comments claiming one sounds better than the other based on a video.
Well, there is a difference in the sound, can't you hear it? As far as I'm concerned, the setup is identical and the difference is in the speakers, making it very possible to judge it.
KEF is better in terms of legibility and delineation of sound.
However, AE better tonal balance. AE has a better lower middle. KEF is a little too much for me.
Very nice comparison. Is Dirac enabled on SA30?
Hi, no, Dirac is not used here. To have the best of Dirac, I would need to recalibrate it with each pair of speakers.
You can't come to any conclusion on sound with a video like this considering it's RUclips, influences of the mic, 6+ pairs of speakers in the room plus your own speakers or headphones you're listening with. The only thing you can possibly judge here are aesthetics. In this case, for me, Acoustic Energy AE500 for the win on their matching stands.
I agree. Judging sound quality on a cell phone is fruitless.
Hey man, it's all RELATIVE to each other and your respective taste. Both excellent.
Theres always that guy on these threads...so you couldnt tell the difference between a Klipsch and pair of B&W over youtube? You must have really shitty hearing.
I am having now for first time ls50 meta for try in my setup and I have really problem tom get tht somebody says they are analitical. What I hear is aabsolutely great reproduction of musical instruments without any color, ...just like the instrument really sounds. Paired with cambridge axa35,....with naim xs2 it is not good pairing.
disclaimer, after break in xs2 sound great with metas
@@janulik9535 LS 50 has a reputation for being a little power hungry. I have an AXA 35 as well. Great amp, but at 35 watts I don't think you will get the best the LS 50's can offer. I am not surprised you added the disclaimer.
@yyl1060 the disclaimer was not adressed to axa35 but to xs2. Dispite kef ls50 meta having reputation of being power hungry and minimum recomended power of the amplifier is 40 per channel into 8 ohm, axa35 is handling them well. Of course there is difference if you use stronger amplification but there are many stronger amplifiers per claimed wattage number which will not handle them as axa35 for sure. That was the point of my oreginal coment.
@@janulik9535 Understood. I am not knocking the Cambridge. As I say I own one and I think it is a great amp for the money. Just saying there are times when certain amp/speaker combinations don't always combine well.
It's good that you are happy with yours and enjoy your listening!
@@boneseyyl1060 thx for the reply, yes I agree, I prefer much xs2 not surprisingly, but axa35 is an kick ass for 350 bucks :) off course loud volumes are not a considaration here
Imagine, if you will, ae500s with a Sunfire sub. SHEESH.
Acoustic energy are miles better
Minelli on the AE520 would be good.
Here you go. All the songs +1 extra. Not the best quality, maybe the mic is too close, but I hope you'll like it ruclips.net/video/jF0fYlfkdX8/видео.html
Ae500 for me
ае500👍
АЕ однозначно лучше.
AE500. Hands down winner
Why??
What's your opinion about the ls50 meta and elac dbr 62 in terms of sound quality? . Thank you.
Both very good speakers, but different price range and different quality. KEFs are much more detailed and the bass is faster and tighter. They also have better soundstage.
But ELACs have better price/quality ratio I would say. Sound is natural, well balanced, a bit warmer than KEF.
Also, worth noting that KEFs require a very good amplification to get the best out of them.
@@garsonamai4528 Thank you so much for your detailed explanation. 👍
To my ear, the kef sound a little too bright when compare to the ae500
Yes, KEFs are a bit brighter and not everyone likes it. But they are very detailed.
They sound like my iPad 😅……
Kef won🏆
AE!
je prefere les ae500 ,le medium est plus pur ,l aigu est meilleur , , ls50 un peu trop feutré
AE
google 'do those videos of speakers actually mean anything?'
The KEF Metas more transparent sound.
Kef is much more neutral more accurate better imaging outher speaker has a boosted upper octave witch to to the untrained ear would seem more detailed but put it in a normal room and it will become very fatigued sounding fast same old tricks to sell speakers of lower quality many people enjoy distortion its your money
classical please
I hated my LS50 meta. Almost anything is better to me.
What you don't like about them?
@@garsonamai4528 They are objectively good speakers. For me they were just no fun to listen to at all. Dynamically flat with a one note bass. I tried to like them, but they're just not for me.
@@Bob.martens hmm strange, I would describe their bass as dynamic and detailed. What amplifier you use?
@@garsonamai4528 Yamaha A-S 1100
Kef bigger sound and Punchier bass. Acoustic cleaner but thinner and boxy mids. Kef has richer warmer vocals.
Cheaper Dali Oberon beats them both
Kefs sound hollow. Very tinny.
I would say they sound thinner but not "tinny". That describes high frequency sibilance to me, which I did not hear from the Kef. I found the AE500 to have a boomy sound to it, but you would probably describe it as "fuller". I think the tonal accuracy of the Kef is hands down better. In the case of these two speakers I would find listening to the Kef to be less fatiguing to my ear. The boominess and warm sound of the 500 I find to be a bit overpowering. If I was listening to the 500's I would probably play them at slightly lower volumes than the Kefs to enjoy the warm sound.
KEF not good
Kef! Kef! More natural.
EWWW.
KEF.
KEF LS50 Meta......for shure
the kefs have it
Kef LS50 Meta 1-0
kef is just wrong
SA30 is not a good match for AE500...
AE