Hi, I just got the 105/2. Unfortunately, they have a problem , the KEF B300 woofers are rubbing the voice coils. I am very sad. If someone could help me with some advices regarding repair. I understand it is the spider that sags. I don't know if they can be repaired/replaced? I'm located in Canada. Thank You
The Official KEF 105 Owners Registry
- Thread starter hjames
- Start date
moebuster
Super Member
I started out with a rough pair of cabinets that i just couldn't at least try to save.
They'd apparently lived a rough life and had sat out in the elements for an extended period.
(A previous owner "accessed" the inside of the cabinet for some reason)
I It was a lot of work but they turned out pretty good and sound wonderful.
I'm proud to have them.
They'd apparently lived a rough life and had sat out in the elements for an extended period.
(A previous owner "accessed" the inside of the cabinet for some reason)
I It was a lot of work but they turned out pretty good and sound wonderful.
I'm proud to have them.
Last edited:
Picked up a decent set of these recently. Mine are the 105.4 with the dual 8's. they sound good, but I need some pics of the "hats" for the top so I can construct some.
Anybody here have a set they could so some measurements on for me?
Anybody here have a set they could so some measurements on for me?
Moebuster,
I purchased spare fuses for my 105's (Mk1) from Parts Express:
https://www.parts-express.com/littelfuse-500ma-gma-fast-blow-fuse-5-pcs--071-810 (HF fuse)
https://www.parts-express.com/littelfuse-800ma-gma-fast-blow-fuse-5-pcs--071-816 (MF fuse)
Note: these are 'fast blow' fuses meaning they don't have the time delay as the slow blow fuses but I'd rather have the fuse blow rather than the mid-range or tweeter. I haven't blown a MF fuse but did pop a few HF fuses over the years.
Hope this helps,
Bob
Ok, as an owner of a pair of 105's purchased in 1980 (demo's) those 'before' photos were hard to look at considering how expensive they were when they first came out. A huge thanks for getting them back up and running again and I'm glad you are enjoying them. In fact my pair came slightly after your's: you have serial number 4050 A/B and mine are 4063 A/B!
Bob
moebuster
Super Member
Thanks Bob.
One of the cabinets was ROUGH.
Throw away rough, but I was determined to save it and not so much from a cosmetic point of view which was impossible but from a use approach and I managed to do that.
These are keepers.i love em.
Question-
Should I stick with the PE fast blow fuses or the original type since I have a few of the o.e. style now?
One of the cabinets was ROUGH.
Throw away rough, but I was determined to save it and not so much from a cosmetic point of view which was impossible but from a use approach and I managed to do that.
These are keepers.i love em.
Question-
Should I stick with the PE fast blow fuses or the original type since I have a few of the o.e. style now?
As I recall I only had one or two of the original HF fuses with my 105's and I ended up buying 500 mA fast blow fuses from Radio Shack so I had spares. You can use the ones you have and switch over to the fast blows as needed. Then again back when I was using a turntable for music an accidental tonearm drop might pop a HF fuse; it's been a really long time since I've popped one since listening mainly to CDs and I have/had some rather high power amps over the years.
I get the feeling someone had no idea of the importance of those 105's you saved and restored - I dug up my receipt for when I purchased mine back in 1980 and they were $1,700 at the time, along with a couple other items.
Edit: I did put a post up in the KEF Owner's thread if you want to see what my 105's look like.
http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/kef-owners-thread.630884/
I would suggest posting pictures of your KEF 105 in this thread. You may get more people shuddering and crying at your original pictures and thanking you for bringing them back to life.
Bob
Mind_Drive
New Member
I have a pair of 105.1, serial number 3284 A and B.
These are my second pair. I actually bought this pair whilst still owning the first pair and I am so glad I did- direct comparison showed this "new" pair to sound better!
The first pair I owned had already been recapped with Wilmslow Audio supersound caps before I bought them (for those that don't know Wilmslow is a major hifi component/service business in the UK)
After opening up the second pair i was surprised to find them still on the original elcaps.
I sold on the first pair and kept the second. The only loss was the fantastic walnut veneers- the second pair are teak I think,
I recently decided to recap these. I could have chosen an easier crossover for my first project!
Anyway after a run-in period, they are definitely sounding a bit clearer and less congested. Best sound yet.
These are my second pair. I actually bought this pair whilst still owning the first pair and I am so glad I did- direct comparison showed this "new" pair to sound better!
The first pair I owned had already been recapped with Wilmslow Audio supersound caps before I bought them (for those that don't know Wilmslow is a major hifi component/service business in the UK)
After opening up the second pair i was surprised to find them still on the original elcaps.
I sold on the first pair and kept the second. The only loss was the fantastic walnut veneers- the second pair are teak I think,
I recently decided to recap these. I could have chosen an easier crossover for my first project!
Anyway after a run-in period, they are definitely sounding a bit clearer and less congested. Best sound yet.
Mind_Drive
New Member
Well, I wasn't able to test the old ones which might well have been in tolerance. Its surprising how 40 year old electrolytic can sometimes be OK.
I know about KEF's driver/cap matching system of old, so there is always the chance that the cap values you use may not be quite right. I decided to take the risk. I used a mix of Alcaps from Falcon Acoustics and Mundorf E-caps in the T52 tweeter section.
I know about KEF's driver/cap matching system of old, so there is always the chance that the cap values you use may not be quite right. I decided to take the risk. I used a mix of Alcaps from Falcon Acoustics and Mundorf E-caps in the T52 tweeter section.
mccarty350
Super Member
Great find. Love them. How do they compare to your 105/3's? Never heard 105/3's but they seem to have a lot of the 104/2 design ethos, do they match that same sound signature?
I have had the 104.2 and they are definitely vastly different, the uni-q gives a different type of presentation of the mid range. I would say I prefer the tweeter on the 104.2, the 105.3 lacks the sparkle.
105.2 all original, just finished a proper maintenance service for them. Had a spare set of oem kef 105.3 3 way binding posts I installed on them.
105.3 are rebuilt with original drivers. I have a Kube 200 for them but not using it at this time.
I am driving them with a Yamaha a-s2100, cd-s2100, and VPI Scoutmaster Prime.
Both complete with all grills. Crossovers original and crossover caps test fine all original
Impressions
I can't really say if one is better, they have wildly different voicing. Major differences noted that yhe 105.3 extract more detail and have a much more expansive sound stage, and present height detail more clearly. Much more dynamic and forward. Much better for complex recording. Theu can be overwhelming at times. You really feel like you're almost swimming in the mix. Bass response is much better running a massive ss amp with the Kube on the lf section only.
The 105.2 have a bit more of a holographic image, overall a bit more 'musical' . Stinged instruments and vocals have a more natural timbre, a live sound. It is eery how well presented the image is, never heard anything like it. I definitely prefer their bass response, not as articulate or fast but it digs deeper a bit more naturally and seems more full and natural.
I have had the opportunity to demo the current line of kef reference 3 as well as the kef ls50 meta at home, have in store demod the reference 5s... and I have to say the voicing is almost identical to the 105.3. I mean if it was first impressions a/b comparison you wouldn't know the difference. The modern iterations are a little less fatiguing, and have a little lf bump par for the course of modern speakers. The 105.3 have more meat on the bone in the mid range, but you have to be in to that sort of thing I guess .But it is marginal. It's shocking how similar the sound is on their modern line to these 30 year old behemoths. Almost like they're just repackaging an old design(though they are more efficient and look nicer
105.2 all original, just finished a proper maintenance service for them. Had a spare set of oem kef 105.3 3 way binding posts I installed on them.
105.3 are rebuilt with original drivers. I have a Kube 200 for them but not using it at this time.
I am driving them with a Yamaha a-s2100, cd-s2100, and VPI Scoutmaster Prime.
Both complete with all grills. Crossovers original and crossover caps test fine all original
Impressions
I can't really say if one is better, they have wildly different voicing. Major differences noted that yhe 105.3 extract more detail and have a much more expansive sound stage, and present height detail more clearly. Much more dynamic and forward. Much better for complex recording. Theu can be overwhelming at times. You really feel like you're almost swimming in the mix. Bass response is much better running a massive ss amp with the Kube on the lf section only.
The 105.2 have a bit more of a holographic image, overall a bit more 'musical' . Stinged instruments and vocals have a more natural timbre, a live sound. It is eery how well presented the image is, never heard anything like it. I definitely prefer their bass response, not as articulate or fast but it digs deeper a bit more naturally and seems more full and natural.
I have had the opportunity to demo the current line of kef reference 3 as well as the kef ls50 meta at home, have in store demod the reference 5s... and I have to say the voicing is almost identical to the 105.3. I mean if it was first impressions a/b comparison you wouldn't know the difference. The modern iterations are a little less fatiguing, and have a little lf bump par for the course of modern speakers. The 105.3 have more meat on the bone in the mid range, but you have to be in to that sort of thing I guess .But it is marginal. It's shocking how similar the sound is on their modern line to these 30 year old behemoths. Almost like they're just repackaging an old design(though they are more efficient and look nicer
mccarty350
Super Member
That's what I was wondering if the voicing was more in line with the 'Americanized' 104/2 sound or the British 105/2 voicing. Much more dynamic and forward reinforces my suspicion of the 105/3 being part of the 104/2 train.
So the modern KEF trains are following the 105/3 voicing, that's good to know. You are hitting the nail on the head regarding everything I was wondering.
It is also cool to know that they are maintaining their core values and voicing just leveraging newer tech to do so.
So the modern KEF trains are following the 105/3 voicing, that's good to know. You are hitting the nail on the head regarding everything I was wondering.
It is also cool to know that they are maintaining their core values and voicing just leveraging newer tech to do so.
This was one thing I noted while I had the Concertos. The mid and highs were the same, they just didn't go as low as the 104/2s I had or the 105s I have now. I've had my 105s for I think 5 or 6 years. Losing track of time! I had the 104/2s, the concerto, and the 105s all at the same time. My son now has the concertos and I still have the 105s. I love both sets so I'm glad my son wanted them. Especially since the Concertos are a hard sell at $300. Undervalued in my opinion. So far, I've opted not to replace the crossover caps. I drove all 3 Kefs with 2 Bose 1801 power amps. I liked the 104/2s, but I liked the 105s better (by a small margin) as they sounded about equally good, just with strengths and weaknesses. My serial numbers are 4857 A and B. I have a weakness for larger speakers, it seems.
Some Pics
Some Pics
