Official Kef LS50 owners thread

interesting.
do you know what the theory and reasoning behind extreme toe-in is?

how did it improve the sound if the LS50s?

Here's a good article about it. I'm thinking Alan Blumlein was the one who originally came up with the idea. I don't agree with the author of the article about room treatments though, they have been greatly helpful in my room:

http://thehighfidelityreport.com/extreme-toe-in/

In my case, even though my room is acoustically treated to the nines, there is a large bookcase/desk unit behind the listening chair (this is supposed to be a home office). Evidently, that piece of furniture really screws up the acoustics. Someday it will be outa there, but not yet.

So having the speakers toed in more, pointed to the rear corners, where the bass traps are located, and the output hitting more of the treated opposite side walls, solves this problem. The sound is more relaxed and non-fatiguing. There is at least one other fellow on Audio Asylum who also has his LS50s set up like this, as he turned me on to the idea. :) Note that I am using stereo subwoofers with this setup, so the KEFs locations regarding bass output doesn't have to be optimized.

BTW, if you research the work of Alan Blumlein, it is amazing what he accomplished, and such a shame that he died so young. I wonder what more he would of contributed if he had lived a long life.
 
Last edited:
I played with the toe in after reading this. Initially the speakers were toed in with the right speaker pointed to my left ear and the left speaker pointer to my right ear. First, I changed the speakers to straight forward and listened for a while. It seemed like the sound stage was wider but the sound was thinner. I can't move my speakers wider like the guy in the high fidelity report did. I toed the speakers in so that they cross in front of my listening position. It is a more immersive sound and I think i prefer it. I will listen for a while and see if I like it. It does seem like the soundstage is narrower but that's because I couldn't move the speakers further apart.
 
Here's a good article about it. I'm thinking Alan Blumlein was the one who originally came up with the idea. I don't agree with the author of the article about room treatments though, they have been greatly helpful in my room:

http://thehighfidelityreport.com/extreme-toe-in/

In my case, even though my room is acoustically treated to the nines, there is a large bookcase/desk unit behind the listening chair (this is supposed to be a home office). Evidently, that piece of furniture really screws up the acoustics. Someday it will be outa there, but not yet.

So having the speakers toed in more, pointed to the rear corners, where the bass traps are located, and the output hitting more of the treated opposite side walls, solves this problem. The sound is more relaxed and non-fatiguing. There is at least one other fellow on Audio Asylum who also has his LS50s set up like this, as he turned me on to the idea. :) Note that I am using stereo subwoofers with this setup, so the KEFs locations regarding bass output doesn't have to be optimized.

BTW, if you research the work of Alan Blumlein, it is amazing what he accomplished, and such a shame that he died so young. I wonder what more he would of contributed if he had lived a long life.

awesome response and reference, thank you.
i tried this briefly after returning from AXPONA and the GoldenEar demo but it did not sound as good as my previous position with my speakers and room placement.
after reading that article i may have to give it another try.
 
I played with the toe in after reading this. Initially the speakers were toed in with the right speaker pointed to my left ear and the left speaker pointer to my right ear. First, I changed the speakers to straight forward and listened for a while. It seemed like the sound stage was wider but the sound was thinner. I can't move my speakers wider like the guy in the high fidelity report did. I toed the speakers in so that they cross in front of my listening position. It is a more immersive sound and I think i prefer it. I will listen for a while and see if I like it. It does seem like the soundstage is narrower but that's because I couldn't move the speakers further apart.

try aiming with a little less toe-in, as if the left speaker was firing about 6" left of your left ear, etc.
 
Add me to the LS50 owners list! Now I'm all KEF...LS50's, 107's, & 103.2's. Usually I like to have a planar/ribbon/etc around for variety, but I'm a happy camper


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Add me to the LS50 owners list! Now I'm all KEF...LS50's, 107's, & 103.2's. Usually I like to have a planar/ribbon/etc around for variety, but I'm a happy camper


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great to hear someone still likes 'em.:banana:

I'm listening to Physical Graffiti at a copious volume as I type, and they sound great!
 
Last edited:
Seems like most of the earlier posters have moved on from the LS50 :sigh:

Still have mine (as computer speakers with Brio-R)
I see the Stereophile guys still use theirs:beatnik:

I use these as desk top for near field, I'll never get rid of them. Perfect for this application.
 
Add me to the LS50 owners list! Now I'm all KEF...LS50's, 107's, & 103.2's. Usually I like to have a planar/ribbon/etc around for variety, but I'm a happy camper


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very cool :thmbsp:

Do tell on what you think of the LS50 against the 107. Besides the bass, I found the midrange to be less "syrupy" but more accurate and more neutral than the 107. The treble on the LS50 was also more detailed and more transparent (in my opinion).
 
Very cool :thmbsp:

Do tell on what you think of the LS50 against the 107. Besides the bass, I found the midrange to be less "syrupy" but more accurate and more neutral than the 107. The treble on the LS50 was also more detailed and more transparent (in my opinion).

I find your description pretty spot on to what I'm hearing. The 107's sound a little warmer, a little more syrupy, not as detailed on the top end...but still plenty good in the mids and highs...of course their strength is the bass, when it's called upon.

The LS50's are incredibly clear and neutral...the best I've heard, clarity wise, besides the Apogee ribbons I had. I haven't really ran them on their own, I run them with an 8" sub...actually I did run them on their own in a near-field desktop set-up for 2-3 days and they were outstanding overall...sounded like there was a sub under the desk, but there wasn't! In the larger living room I have them in though, I think the sub definitely helps.
 
Seems like most of the earlier posters have moved on from the LS50 :sigh:

Still have mine (as computer speakers with Brio-R)
I see the Stereophile guys still use theirs:beatnik:

I moved on from mine. Not because of how they sound but I moved my office into a much larger room and the LS50's just did not work there. I replaced them with the Focal which are about 10x the size :D
 
I still have mine and I'm still digging them. I think if I were to think of moving on it would be a for a floor stander. I'd rather move up with my amp first to see how they improve with better power. What speakers in their price range are better? They are not the weak link in my kit.
 
I moved on from mine. Not because of how they sound but I moved my office into a much larger room and the LS50's just did not work there. I replaced them with the Focal which are about 10x the size :D

This is precisely why I have them...their small size. I agreed with my wife that we'll only have small speakers in the main living room in this house. I knew these would fit the bill. I haven't heard many monitors or bookshelf speakers, but I can't imagine anything being better for the price, especially if you buy used (like I did...with only 10 hours on them). Not saying there's nothing out there that would compete with them, but I'm happy with them so far. My wife thinks they sound better than the 107's.
 
I still have mine and I'm still digging them. I think if I were to think of moving on it would be a for a floor stander. I'd rather move up with my amp first to see how they improve with better power. What speakers in their price range are better? They are not the weak link in my kit.

Agreed, I went through the upgrade "stage" for a few decades, and spent tens and tens of thousands trying to convince myself that "size matters". Size did matter in my large rooms, but the LS50's sound better in my little room than any of my large speakers sounded in my large rooms.

It's hard to describe, but these fit my small room like a glove. I've never been as happy with any speaker ever, and no it's not the stellar reviews that they received initially, but the sheer spacious soundstage they give, with an "almost" full range presentation.
 
The KEF demo at AXPONA this year did a horrible disservice to the sound and perception of the LS50s IMHO.
They were selling them as a Blade competitor capable of filling a large conference room with gobs of Parasound solid state power. Sounded OK and somewhat capable but hardly audiophile sonics.

Yesterday at a local dealer I camped out with them in a medium sized room being run with this tube integrated-
http://www.ravenaudio.com/Nighthawk-MK2-Integrated-Amplifier-_p_11.html
A decent 20wpc tube amp.

SO much better than the AXPONA demo room. Sweet, open, airy, detailed audiophile contentment, a slightly forward yet non-aggressive midrange for vocals and horn lovers dreams and a very respectable bottom end. Basically met my current "preference level" head on.
Never understood the hype surrounding this speaker. Now I do and then some.
A system like this for a medium sized room and you have just entered the apex of additional cost vs. audible returns.
 
The KEF demo at AXPONA this year did a horrible disservice to the sound and perception of the LS50s IMHO.
They were selling them as a Blade competitor capable of filling a large conference room with gobs of Parasound solid state power. Sounded OK and somewhat capable but hardly audiophile sonics.

Yesterday at a local dealer I camped out with them in a medium sized room being run with this tube integrated-
http://www.ravenaudio.com/Nighthawk-MK2-Integrated-Amplifier-_p_11.html
A decent 20wpc tube amp.

SO much better than the AXPONA demo room. Sweet, open, airy, detailed audiophile contentment, a slightly forward yet non-aggressive midrange for vocals and horn lovers dreams and a very respectable bottom end. Basically met my current "preference level" head on.
Never understood the hype surrounding this speaker. Now I do and then some.
A system like this for a medium sized room and you have just entered the apex of additional cost vs. audible returns.


My audition of the LS50 w/PrimaLuna DiaLogue Premium Integrated was very satisfying. I thought tubes and LS50 matched well. Although I've read across the net others (most) preferred SS power
 
I've read folks claim that tubes with the KEFs are the only way to go. Mine are doing OK with an old class A/B, but saving the pennys for a Rogue Atlas.
 
Last edited:
At the previous AXPONA KEF had a nice room and the LS50's sounded better than the blades. One wonders how much treatment is needed and whether those two speakers should be in the same room, since one needs a big room and the other does not.

They were just trying to show off the LS50s to the masses and pushing it to its limits in a large room with mega power. They sounded loud and clean but very gray, one dimensional.
Tube amp in a medium sized room and they are audiophile magic.
 
Back
Top Bottom