Tweet
This is a review/comparison of the KEF XQ5's with Dynaudio Audience 82's:
I purchased a pair of KEF XQ5's used yesterday for $1,000 from Theatrical Concepts Inc. on Craig's List. They seem to be fully broken in; they lack the typical signs to indicate otherwise. Initially I was not sure what to expect since I had never really listened to this model before. I had heard the iQ9's (entry level) at Ultimate Electronics a few years ago when they were a KEF dealer. My impression of those speakers was that they sounded rather thin but with good soundstaging.
Based on the frequency response specifications, before hearing, I didn't expect anything like what the XQ5's produced regarding bass. I anticipated lightweight, tight and fast. Upon auditioning, the bass was the first thing that caught my attention. It was tight and fast, but also, punchy and full without sounding boomy; lightweight was nowhere to be found. There was good transient snap on percussion; easy to follow detail and appropriate bloom on cello/basses; and it did indeed shake the room with its power. It kicked ass.
The next thing immediately noticeable was the soundstage; it was absolutely huge! Images were easy to detect, and placement of them was also easy to determine. The XQ5's soundstaging/imaging competes with speakers above it's normal retail of $3,000/pr, making it a true bargain on the used market.
Now to the interesting part, the midrange/high frequencies. The midrange is very liquid, clear, and neutral sounding. It sounds extremely accurate with horns; very live sounding. Vocals are very good, but a touch on the thin side. There is occasional harshness/glare with a somewhat metallic characteristic to it (logical since the XQ5 has a metal tweeter and hypertweeter). The tweeter is concentric (at the center of the midrange driver), and the hypertweeter is mounted on top of the speaker cabinet in a small chrome isolated chamber. The slight harshness detected isn't constant, but when it occurs it does draw attention to the speakers. I agree with the review in avguide, it's mostly during high frequency peaks. Otherwise both tweeters are very listenable and likeable. Obviously this was not enough to deter my purchase of them.
My thoughts go towards a hybrid amp or tube preamp as possible solutions to the peaks in this area. The hybrid amp should be able to provide the necessary current to drive the speakers while adding some softening to the mids and highs. I wouldn't consider going all tube b/c I have discovered these speakers make my Pass Labs X150 solid-state amp get very hot compared to my Dynaudio's, which are rated to play bass down to 25 Hz with 4 ohms impedance. The increased heat generated is probably due to crossover design; I believe KEF uses much steeper crossover slopes (which are more taxing on an amplifier) relative to Dynaudio, and the XQ5's are a 4-way design.
Before writing this review, I hooked up my Dyn's again, using Red Hot Chili Peppers most recent Greatest Hits album for comparison. Both speakers have some very similar traits: fast, punchy, well-delineated bass; excellent coherence (the inability to perceive transitions from driver-to-driver); frequency response neutrality; good instrumental timbres; excellent detail and transparency.
Where they differ is in their overall presentation. I would describe the Dyn's as being a little more laid-back sounding relative to the KEF's. This has somewhat to do with the above-mentioned forwardness of the KEF's. I would say the KEF's have clarity; detail comes out to meet you. The Dyn's have transparency; detail gives an invitation. The subjectively laid-back perspective of the Dyns may also result from the higher-sensitivity of the KEF's, which makes them seem to "wake-up" a little faster with the volume-control. Since the KEF's don't reproduce bass as low as the Dyn's, they may also seem subjectively quicker (although, not necessarily the case).
I still consider the Dyn's my reference. I found that I was able to relax into the music more, never feeling a loss of anything, musically speaking, once I switched back to them. In fact, I gained bass depth and retained delineation (the XQ5's do have more punch/slam in the bass). I would also say coherency and neutrality were a slight step-up, as well, since there were no glare issues with the Dyn's. Yes, the soundstage wasn't quite as wide, image not quite as focused; but the effortlessness of listening returned.
The KEF's cabinet construction far surpasses the Dyn's.
The KEF's I am, therefore, proud to own and will enjoy sonically as one would a sports car. 'I wanna go fast, I wanna go fast, I wanna go fast' - Ricky Bobby. There is definitely a high excitement factor to the sound of them. And the Dyn's I would liken to a luxury sedan (smooth travels, with class and long-term comfort).
-JBreezy-
I purchased a pair of KEF XQ5's used yesterday for $1,000 from Theatrical Concepts Inc. on Craig's List. They seem to be fully broken in; they lack the typical signs to indicate otherwise. Initially I was not sure what to expect since I had never really listened to this model before. I had heard the iQ9's (entry level) at Ultimate Electronics a few years ago when they were a KEF dealer. My impression of those speakers was that they sounded rather thin but with good soundstaging.
Based on the frequency response specifications, before hearing, I didn't expect anything like what the XQ5's produced regarding bass. I anticipated lightweight, tight and fast. Upon auditioning, the bass was the first thing that caught my attention. It was tight and fast, but also, punchy and full without sounding boomy; lightweight was nowhere to be found. There was good transient snap on percussion; easy to follow detail and appropriate bloom on cello/basses; and it did indeed shake the room with its power. It kicked ass.
The next thing immediately noticeable was the soundstage; it was absolutely huge! Images were easy to detect, and placement of them was also easy to determine. The XQ5's soundstaging/imaging competes with speakers above it's normal retail of $3,000/pr, making it a true bargain on the used market.
Now to the interesting part, the midrange/high frequencies. The midrange is very liquid, clear, and neutral sounding. It sounds extremely accurate with horns; very live sounding. Vocals are very good, but a touch on the thin side. There is occasional harshness/glare with a somewhat metallic characteristic to it (logical since the XQ5 has a metal tweeter and hypertweeter). The tweeter is concentric (at the center of the midrange driver), and the hypertweeter is mounted on top of the speaker cabinet in a small chrome isolated chamber. The slight harshness detected isn't constant, but when it occurs it does draw attention to the speakers. I agree with the review in avguide, it's mostly during high frequency peaks. Otherwise both tweeters are very listenable and likeable. Obviously this was not enough to deter my purchase of them.
My thoughts go towards a hybrid amp or tube preamp as possible solutions to the peaks in this area. The hybrid amp should be able to provide the necessary current to drive the speakers while adding some softening to the mids and highs. I wouldn't consider going all tube b/c I have discovered these speakers make my Pass Labs X150 solid-state amp get very hot compared to my Dynaudio's, which are rated to play bass down to 25 Hz with 4 ohms impedance. The increased heat generated is probably due to crossover design; I believe KEF uses much steeper crossover slopes (which are more taxing on an amplifier) relative to Dynaudio, and the XQ5's are a 4-way design.
Before writing this review, I hooked up my Dyn's again, using Red Hot Chili Peppers most recent Greatest Hits album for comparison. Both speakers have some very similar traits: fast, punchy, well-delineated bass; excellent coherence (the inability to perceive transitions from driver-to-driver); frequency response neutrality; good instrumental timbres; excellent detail and transparency.
Where they differ is in their overall presentation. I would describe the Dyn's as being a little more laid-back sounding relative to the KEF's. This has somewhat to do with the above-mentioned forwardness of the KEF's. I would say the KEF's have clarity; detail comes out to meet you. The Dyn's have transparency; detail gives an invitation. The subjectively laid-back perspective of the Dyns may also result from the higher-sensitivity of the KEF's, which makes them seem to "wake-up" a little faster with the volume-control. Since the KEF's don't reproduce bass as low as the Dyn's, they may also seem subjectively quicker (although, not necessarily the case).
I still consider the Dyn's my reference. I found that I was able to relax into the music more, never feeling a loss of anything, musically speaking, once I switched back to them. In fact, I gained bass depth and retained delineation (the XQ5's do have more punch/slam in the bass). I would also say coherency and neutrality were a slight step-up, as well, since there were no glare issues with the Dyn's. Yes, the soundstage wasn't quite as wide, image not quite as focused; but the effortlessness of listening returned.
The KEF's cabinet construction far surpasses the Dyn's.
The KEF's I am, therefore, proud to own and will enjoy sonically as one would a sports car. 'I wanna go fast, I wanna go fast, I wanna go fast' - Ricky Bobby. There is definitely a high excitement factor to the sound of them. And the Dyn's I would liken to a luxury sedan (smooth travels, with class and long-term comfort).
-JBreezy-
Comment