SOUND BATTLE KEF LS50 Meta VS B&W Bowers&Wilkins 705 S2 Sound Comparison. Worth for the money TWICE?

[@abccbc11]

These comparisons are really valuable. The B&W is more fun and I much prefer them.

[@brerazr]

Listening to the KEFs is like listening to the 705s behind a curtain. Btw, a great comparison video.

[@kenhiett5266]

Except the KEF's respond really well to what's upstream. I'm also hearing a tunnel artifact from the B&W's that's a deal breaker for me.

[@wp7187]

It may be worth hearing the difference in person. I hear it often said by critics of B&W that the treble is too forward and over accentuated, meaning that it could sound like the clearer speaker through here but end up sounding unnaturally sharp when your hear it one on one.

[@napoleonlesparg8352]

Straight from the pipe, this is the sound of b&w, nothing to do with music. Go to concerts, go and listen live music.

[@majicogarcia8417]

The KEF sounds more like the actual recording than the BW does. Too much treble on the Bowers. kzbin.info/www/bejne/omXKpGOYicx7i80

[@余立山-j7c]

❤❤​@@wp7187

[@carlimalo]

It is a personal perception, in my opinion quite defined sounds in the BW, the KEF I feel the sound like covered by a blanket

[@mekore]

So amazed with how experts can judge soundstage from a utube vid

[@bgoldsm]

Exactly what I was looking for...would love to hear other genres on these 2 as well :)

[@franciscoortiz6980]

Love the detail and clarity of the B&W. Kef is good with nice timing. Not fair though the 705s2 are twice the price. 706 would be fair comparison.

[@MasterofPlay7]

BW sounded too lean

[@LeonardoRibeiroUFRJ_CCS]

@@MasterofPlay7Concordo plenamente

[@romiegumayagay8899]

I agree, not fair on KEF, but not far off, why not compare to KEF R3 Meta to B & W 607 S2.. then that would be a real battle!!!! I would pick up kef any day!!

[@elgustoesmiochupaki6119]

B&W, all the way. Music should sound the way it is. Pair the 705 S2 with a REL subwoofer (7) and let it rip. The soundstage will be EPIC with exquisite detailing and more air than than a GEX9 turbo fan at take off.

[@tubedaegun]

At the first listening, 705 S2 was much brighter than LS50 meta. After listening the original music with the headphone, I realized that the female voice of 705 is too emphasized at the high frequency. I don't know whether it's the microphone problem, but I think kef ls50 meta produced more natural sound compared with the original music.

[@MasterofPlay7]

exactly BW sounded too lean, but some people like that

[@hauhoang1637]

Agree with a couple previous comments, not a fair comparison. KEF is about 2.5dB lower in sensitivity and therefore should have been level adjusted accordingly. Once that is done, KEF sounds solid and warmer. B&W is a little bright and thin.

[@thomasfitzhugh7936]

The 705s sounds more dynamic with more bass, highs & a wider soundstage. Anyone who's not a fan of the bright tweeter may find it more satisfying with a warmer amp.

[@AbsoluteFidelity]

Anyone not a fan of bright speaker should stay away from this speaker.

[@georgedomse]

Sorry, but this is the wrong approach. Nobody should buy a speaker they don't like in the vain hope that getting an amp they wouldn't like either will pull it magically to the point of a great sound. In other words: sh*t+sh*t will not add up to great.

[@thomasfitzhugh7936]

@@georgedomse save ur apology. A friend of mine owns a pair of B&W's, when he upgraded his amp the sound of the highs went from hot & razor sharp to warmer & more balanced. This move of his wasn't in vain at all, the sound is nothing short of beautiful.

[@LeonardoRibeiroUFRJ_CCS]

@@thomasfitzhugh7936Seja justo, isto acontece com qualquer caixa. Liga a Kef num Roksan Caspian m2 e verá que a BW está totalmente desorganizada seja em qual amp for! Kef Wins mais uma fez e não parará por aí.

[@DougMen1]

The KEF is sweeter and more natural sounding. The B&W is thinner and brighter, with the over emphasized treble trying to be too "hi-fi", because too many listeners mistake brighter treble for more detail, which isn't the case

[@kenhiett5266]

This. What people like about the B&W's in this comparison would inevitably fatigue, be fussy about the equipment upstream, and make some recordings difficult to listen to from the very beginning.

[@turntableman100]

B&W speakers are sounded more open and spacious then the Kef meta. I've noticed the vocal are distorted with Kef speakers. But B&W with vocals always the king and flawless hands down I would choose the B&W speakers to me

[@DYNABLASTERTUNERS]

Not distorted but flat and no emotion

[@totizedger]

I think that the B&W 705 S2 sounds too bright for my ears, the KEF has a warmer sound signature but to be honest the vocals sound more natural on the KEF but her voice is definetly less clear like there is a curtain in front though, it seems more punchy in the bass though. 705 S2 are more open in the highs and more detailed in the highs, i guess 705 S2 works best with Classical and Instrumental music. If you can deal with the more pronounced treble of the 705 S2 then it's definetly the better speaker here of the two

[@louisctam]

Agree, B&W sounds more aggressive, and KEF is more lay back and mild.

[@johnhernlund539]

Much agreed, B&Ws are fatiguing even after 10 seconds.

[@BreathEmpowerment]

@@johnhernlund539 add some tubes in the mix ;) Adds even more air and extension to the highs but smooths them out. I don't enjoy pure solid state anymore, though I have yet to listen to a good T amp. I find the B&W more engaging and detailed for active listening, but I don't have a problem with the high end. My main system is a restored Scott 222-D and Altec 9849 studio monitors with the metal 32b horn. Cymbals sound like they're right in the room

[@菅家智成]

@@BreathEmpowerment

[@melvinaperez2585]

Kef just can't outmatched the B&W.

[@zoltanmaszlag2982]

Professional comparison, thank you very much

[@carlosaguilar6743]

Both are great speakers ,The KEF style reminds me the speakers when i was in Mexico, Brands like graber of "Jensen "etc, with the tweeter on the center of the cone with a well balanced sound, B&W got crispy and detailed sound.

[@anthonyp.3486]

705 S2 for sure!

[@garethwynn01]

All of the KEF speakers seemed to be voiced a bit like studio monitors. There doesn't seem to be any part of the frequency range that seems to be emphasized. That does make them sound a little bit more "flat" and boxy but actually it's probably just a very neutral representation of the sound. The B&Ws sound very "airy" and exciting in comparison but I'm not sure how long I could listen to them with that amount of treble and in some cases the treble becomes quite coarse and unpleasant. I think the voicing of the KEF is far more listenable.

[@PeterMacPL]

Compare please KEF LS50 Meta vs ELAC DBR62

[@hoanghai2k]

Kef is so enjoy to hear, like everyday sound that we wanna hear

[@stevenoconnor5693]

I have the 705s2 they are just magnificent. A real joy to listen to.

[@laurensvandenbroek1580]

What amp do you use? They seem to be hard to drive and need a really good amp

[@wotzefak-mazafak]

I use 705 s2 with marantz 5015 av receiver. They sound perfectly (with additional subwoofer + antimode dsp)

[@ikon6_king]

705 s2 sound great but a long time listening it's getting harsh for the ears ls50 enjoyable listening

[@runepedersenDK]

Like the soundscape on the KEF the most. Not as fatiguing as B&W, as "Res Les" also mentioned below. Maybe the KEF's are more "phase linear" with its center tweeter? KEF could use a bit more highs though.

[@turreu]

The original LS50 has more highs, Meta is a bit muffled in comparison.

[@LeonardoRibeiroUFRJ_CCS]

@@turreuE justamente por isto as KEF SÃO melhores, muito melhor! E não é questão de gosto. É fato.

[@LeonardoRibeiroUFRJ_CCS]

Mesmo a BW custando bem mais, a KEF é absurdamente equilibrada, musical, tem graves realistas e são com certeza a minha escolha.

[@HenryTheBoilermaker3rdYear]

I own kef ls50 and im watching this video with kef ls50. I have listened to a b&w speaker in store before i think it was the 602 or something. From what i can compare, the sound on the kef is definitely much warmer and this video shows it. I had to eq my kef ls50 to sound brighter on my yamaha a3080 avr. The klipsch hometheater speakers are much warmer too. B&W and Yamaha speakers sound just right without needing to eq and would be a perfect match with my yamaha a3080 avr.

[@noellop7658]

This is soooo useful. Been considering the B&W 705. Can you also do a test of fyne audio, people say good things.

[@nymarty]

I think the KEF needs better amplification. It’s much less efficient than the B&W and much less expensive, but needs more power than it’s getting here. Both are great speakers. I thought this was a a great video/audio comparison. Thank you.

The Kef Ls50 meta is an outstanding speaker with unrivaled dynamics in its field...I hear it is the clear winner of this comparison

[@VinnieMoore1986]

BMW👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👏🏻

[@anuarivanov6790]

I listened to many comparisons of the KEF LS50, and once again I was convinced that they have a bucket sound. Or a large saucepan.

[@Hutzjohn]

the KEF's sound slightly muffled and the B&W's a bit cleaner more clear.......but they are BOTH very good!!!!

[@xiaozhang9883]

I have listened to them both in person. B&W is more detailed but it can get harsh when crank up the volume. It's more suitable for jazz and classical music. Whereas the kef is leaning toward the neutral and balanced sound. You can listen to them for long periods of time without getting fatigued. I ended up purchasing the ls60 and have been enjoying them every single day.

[@roikhockenberger2790]

KEF ls50 metas are more transparent and much less coloring of her voice. The B&Ws have more bass and midrange weight, but perhaps at the expense of box coloration.

[@Kiwi_Col]

I agree with you, to me her voice on the 705's sounds like it's going through a cardboard tube. The Meta's may not be quite as clear, but to me is more accurate overall.

[@audioman6007]

The cambridge should work better with the kefs, that nad amp will be perfect for the b&w, the nad is the better amp and the b&w are the better speakers. The end.

[@revivehificanada]

Monitor audio silver 100 7g is a great alternative to these. They don't need a sub and are exciting without being shrill at all.

[@daniannaci3258]

Won’t argue here, as I own both Bowers and Wilkins 805 D4 in my living room and KEF LS50 Meta on my desktop for mixing my recordings (Both great 👍). But what are those too-cool-for-school speaker stands you are using in the video?? A link maybe?

[@triekps4821]

Of course B&W. KEF wasn't even close. But also different price tag, so what do you expect?

[@germanmenendez1401]

BW is for me. Easier to drive and seems better in low volume listening sessions... KEF is the usual speaker that needs volume and a big power amplifier to shine (my Wharfedale diamond 9.1 can shine too in that circumstance). With a regular amplifier and volumen are dead... For me worth the money if not I would go for 707s2. This would be the right comparison and would surprise. I have done it.

[@raymondallo9947]

Get the KEF + KEF KC62 SubWoofer and you have a sweet combo. Still less than the B&W. The KEF does need a decent (power) amp in my opinion.

[@nathanadler3197]

Considering the price difference, the difference should be clearly audible. Fortunately, it is. The B&W 705 could be the perfect step after the LS50 on the audiophile journey.

[@alexandredomingues6552]

Ce sont 2 très bonnes enceintes, mais je n'aimes pas trop ce "voile" que les KEF ont dans le médium. Avez vous déjà écouté des enceintes Jean Marie Reynaud (JMR) ? C'est tellement agréable :D

[@mietekkowalski935]

B&W 🎶🎶🎶🎶🤗✌️✌️✌️✌️🇵🇱

[@RobertSmith-zd4oi]

As below match speakers to Amp, I listened to 7 pairs paired with my Roksan Attessa streamer and I went with the 706 S2, metas we’re ok but nothing special, the best 2 of the day were the 706 and R3s for the 2 of us listening including owner we all agreed 706 was the best crisp highs and nice low end thumps, speakers are subjective as we all have differing needs tastes. All I will say is don’t blind buy after reading reviews and listening on the tube, what I thought I was going to get I was so wrong ….

[@mtkreger]

If you listen to this and go away thinking the KEFs sound better, congrats! You will have saved yourself a lot of money, other than on the amplification you'll need to properly drive them What would have been interesting is if the vid showed the KEFs while the sound was actually from the B&Ws and vice versa...then to read people's comments. I have listened to both in person and properly set up. There really is no comparison.

[@oluhamilton2121]

Like to compare either of these with Acoustic Energy 500s.

[@MrOliver1444]

I have to say in this setup the BW are better. More space, deeper bass, more clear but could be more fatiguing. Depends also on the music. My experience with the KEF was the wireless version was better - more bass, better midrange less bright then the combo with Cambridge CX81 and no amp, dac, streamer and cables needed. Which makes it 1000-1800 pounds cheaper

[@rishinarang9966]

The Vocals on the 705 s2 are so much more crisp.

[@RobertNoone-u7r]

Why didn't they try to match price tags

[@halrichard1969]

They both sound very full and spacy. The only difference I can hear is that perhaps the Bowers Willkens drivers are more sensitive and the E Project guys played them both at the same volume. As I was listening I tried to imagine the KEFs with a bit more volume and with that could not determine a like or dislike, one over the other.

[@williammiebach1798]

Subjectively for me, neither of these are perfectly to my taste, either in overall tonal balance or textural quality, due to the inherent charictor of their driver materials, and in the case of the B&W's particularly their voicing, yet they are both extrmely good in many ways. The Metas I feel are clear and more tonaly balanced, and maintain it over a wider listening area. The 705's have great clarity as well and deeper bass, but with a more accentuated, shimmery top end and midrange. Something tells me the B&W's will fill a larger space more convincingly, but taking price into consideration as well, for me the KEF is the more rounded choice between them.

[@williammiebach1798]

After two listenings the B&W's brightness and sharpness became fatiguing to me in this comparison, and began to hurt my ears. The KEF's did not as much.

[@광식-e8y]

kef is easy to hear and better to listen for long time

[@MarcosViniciusGuarese]

What the best for you, kef r6 or polk?

[@tiborbado816]

705-I have a 705 S2 with a Yamaha R-N803D, Audioquest Type 9-FR cables, it sounds excellent.

[@daves.6778]

My .02: 705 S2 for the win! I've listened to about 20 of these today as I'm shopping for speakers and have come to realize I'm not a KEF guy. Perhaps the R3 Meta will change my position.

[@andrew-o5i]

not a battle more of a slaughter

[@marnixkievit600]

I am a owner of this B and W speaker it is a pleasure to listen to this speaker and in this test the 705 are more open in the sound than these Kef speaker. More detail in the highs en the lows are very good also.

[@andrejsvis3451]

Thanks a lot! A very good test to help determine when choosing acoustics for yourself. Well chosen track. In my taste and desire to hear music, B&W are better implemented.

[@themastroiannis]

the B&W are more dynamic and they will be better for a larger space. i prefer the more round/integrated sound of the Kefs. highs are too accentuated on the B&Ws. they would need a different, warmer amp. kefs seem more forgiving of the amp.

[@bw6238]

Excellent comparison video. I loved the switching back and forth between the two at the end. Both are quality speakers no doubt. The B&W's are treble forward and the KEF's are the opposite. It's almost like there is a tweeter switch being turned off and on when I listened to each. Tweeter switch on=B&W; switch off=KEF. Wonder what they would sound like playing together?

[@abrahamelias95]

The 705s sound more forward and with more information on the highs, a bit more analytical and the kefs sound a bit more cohesive and with a bit fuller mids. At least it what I hear on the video

[@eprojectEllie]

I agree with your thought~

[@myplaguesify]

the new bnw are bright irregardless of entry level or flagship its just bright

[@bencosturbz7755]

What i like about my b&ws is they are power hungry but give them the power and they can take it , it suprises me how far i can take my them giving them 150wpc they can take some power and go serioisly loud

[@ЮрийРоманенко-ы8р]

The choice of test material is "very specific". It is worth checking the quality of acoustic systems on two-microphone recordings of chamber and symphonic music, acoustic jazz, and opera vocals. Plastic porridge from the sound engineer's head splashed on the audio track is not the kind of material that allows you to adequately assess the frequency, dynamic and phase characteristics and the level of distortion of sound equipment. Undoubtedly, the old disease of KEF is the low return of their speakers in the upper frequency range. When compared with them, B&W is the effect of pulling sulfur plugs out of the listener's ears. I would personally compare B&W to Dynaudio.

[@respondent5226]

What is the best current Bookshelf Speaker? (Muslc ONLY)

[@renatogonzalezmora4191]

Siempre B&W excesivamente brillante

[@fredfungalspore]

My right ear likes the KEF My left ear likes the BW 705s But on my cell both speakers sound the same.

[@dariopieterson]

🤣🤣

[@salami124]

TRY WITH A BATHING CAP !

[@acmuscravageur3627]

Night and Day………B&W by far better sounding speakers

[@ronnyronny8424]

Very nice video, but you can't compare these! Why? The price is way off. B&W 3000 euro pair Kef 1200 euro pair

[@RobertNoone-u7r]

I am waiting for the keffs so i have great curiosity cus i was looking at the B&Ws.But if the B&W is lot more money i might be happy cus not that big a difference that i can tell here

[@RayPaganJr]

I have an old pair of 705s. I switched for the LS50 Metas for about six months. After breaking in I have to say that I’m not a fan of the KEF. I went back and reinstalled the B&Ws to my stereo system and sounds like I got a brand new upgraded set of speakers. Also I needed a louder pair when I’m practicing my bass. Thinking about just selling the KEF and getting new 705 S2.

[@KenKenho100]

Kef is more easy to listen, B&W "look" more clear and bright. For me a bit dry and crispy. It hurt for long listening.

[@allansayson5587]

Clearly B&W 705 S2.

[@Audiomainia2310]

LS-50 Meta has a more well rounded sounded stage, where the B&W are more directional - so for off axis listening, the KEF wins hands down.

[@telelaci2]

You can hear the off axis via youtube ? Wow !

[@Audiomainia2310]

@@telelaci2 I've heard both speakers in person. Any other stupid questions?

[@telelaci2]

@@Audiomainia2310 Yes. What is well rounded sound stage ? The other one has edgy sound stage ? What's that ?

[@Audiomainia2310]

@@telelaci2 Does this require an answer? Time to move along - go to FB or Twitter if you're looking for a debate.

[@telelaci2]

@@Audiomainia2310 It has nothing to do with debate. You say very clever things, like "rounded sound stage" - but you have no idea what does that mean. Nobody has, but it sounds good. By the way some people who really listened both speakers, perfectly know (below) that these two speakers are not comparable because they are in different category. B&W wins in every aspect because it's a better design built from better parts, therefore it's much more expensive. "so for off axis listening, the KEF wins" - lolol, no one wants to listen Hifi music "off axis", will you go to the kichen to cook something and then KEF sounds better from next to the pot ? You donno what are you talking about, there is no such an aspect that "off axis listening" when you buy a Hifi speaker. If you can't sit in the center, in between the speakers, then you are unlucky, and the problem is not only the "off axis", but different distances from speakers and different reflections. There is only one sweet spot in your room. Even in this very silly video (speakers placed 40cm from each others, near to the floor!) anyone can hear that B&W has much more high and more bass, more dynamics, more power. It's not a different sound stage, but very different frequency response, that you can hear even thru youtube codecs and some kind of cheap mike ! People say "KEF is like B&W behind a curtain" - and that is not matter of taste, but difference between categories. And you'll hear that difference also when you compare B&W 805D3 to B&W 705S2. Different price levels different worlds. By the way, just FYI, there is a guy on youtube who was a big KEF LS50 fan (tharbamar), he loved it very much, it was his reference speaker (it's a very good speaker anyway), but he replaced it with B&W 706S2 about a year ago. He said 706S2 was better in every aspect. Fine but 705S2 is much better than 706S2 and it costs almost 2 times more. I think B&W knows exacly why they sell 705S2 for 2x more and 805D3 for 5x more. Of course you can compare even 805D3 to KEF LS50, and you'd say KEF wins because it has rounded soundstage, whatever it means. C'mon. The question in the title is silly, because the price goes up exponentially, of course you won't get 2x better speaker for 2x more money, not at all. Only a significantly better one.

[@waldo3454]

They are not adjusted for SPL. The B&Ws are louder. Not a fair comparison.

[@jhunlayugan9139]

I like the sound of BW nice to hear the sounds

[@Larwiz]

B&W Brighter, more energetic, and detailed.

[@zhengchangming7994]

B&W has a stronger sense of presence, but the obvious metallic sound is noisier. The KEF elephant is separated by a veil.

[@melvinaperez2585]

Kef sounds like it is confined in a small area, B & W 705 S2 sound Stage is Very Good.

[@scottgordon1721]

B&W but twice the price I'd buy the Canton 9K at that price point.

[@wallop05]

b & w win

[@totizedger]

I have heard B&W speakers paired with Cambridge amps and to me they are not a good combination, take the forward treble of the Cambridge paired with the forward treble of B&W and it will be piercing. Have compared Cambridge to Marantz and the latter has a warm sound signature that works well with B&W speakers and also the sound is a lot more emotional. To me Cambridge amps are bright sounding and also lacks emotion but that is just my personal opinion of course

[@radugirbea915]

I am neutral, but here B&W 705 sounds better.

[@martifilipponi1024]

B&W all the way wider deeper..mids are constricted on all kefs ( and I own them) right up to R11s.. it seems like they use the same Tweeter and mids in everything

[@lucapinatto]

B&W 🚀

[@MelinaAspero]

Bowers&Wilkins 705 S2 destroy KEF.

[@philthompson8574]

The B&W has a boomy hollow sound I feel I'm hearing a speaker,with Kef I'm hearing a voice

[@josephalvinalmedatv8]

Kef more mellow warm er musical vocals, BW vocals thinner, edgy and can easily cause fatigue.

[@jack1109]

"Better"? Neither - Just different - 705s brighter in the treble but, maybe a tad too bright for me. Could be fatiguing over time. Just shows that you must listen to speakers before forking out £1,000 and more! Both very good speakers.

[@bunc7406]

1. B&W is much more expensive. 2. They don't seem to be volume matched correctly.. Kef's sensitivity is 3db lower. 3. Amp probably isn't a good match.. Kef uses Hegel amps to tune their speakers, as far as I know this CXA61 has less than 100 dampening factor.. whereas Hegel amps have over 2000 dampening factor. Matching them with the right amps will give you a night and day result. From what I hear in this video.. the B&W has more high end clarity, more airy.. although it is leaning more on the bright side.. I am almost certain that during long listening hours.. I'd get sound fatigue. Especially if you like to play music at higher volumes.. the B&W will sound even sharper the louder it goes. Whereas the Kef's are slightly softer.. more polite.. warmer. So I'd get the Kefs, and with the extra money.. add a sub.. or invest in a better amp or dac... I prefer a warmer sound .. and with just enough detail. That's just my personal preference.. everyone has their own audiophile journey to take.. thanks for the video!

[@fedrichorlandineumann3062]

Kef ,kef,kef !more natural

[@markmcfeaters9116]

Great video, great comparison. I like both the Kef and b&w. In 1 room, I have the Kef LS50 wireless 2 with 2 Kef kc 62 subwoofers, which sounds great. As far as my home entertainment system. Breakdown. My amp is a musical fidelity m6 series 5 channel 200X5. My processor, the brains. Nad M17-V2i master series processor, All speakers are bowers n wilkins. Front is 702S2. center is 705S2 paired together for the center channel. Rear 705S2. For home theater use SVS pb3000 subwoofers. It sounds fantastic in stereo and home theater.

[@ericbrecy4660]

Sorry but something wrong with this test... I already compared Kef LS50 Meta and 705 drived by Hegel h190/Tidal and i can swear that it was exactly the opposite résult !!! Kef was so much more accurate, the sound so much better and defined !!!! Very weird ! I really don't understand this test because my experience is absolutly not same !

[@richardzedman1160]

the B&W are way too bright even listening on here it hurts my ears

[@brugj03]

Nice comparison. They both sound not great to me. The B&W are listenable to a degree. The kefs are dismal but that is usually the case, i think they just sound bad because of the flawed design.

[@aficionadohiend]

B&W too bright for my taste. Also the sound of the B&W is more forward. LS50 more balanced and natural sound, a little laid back which is better for long listening sessions without ear fatigue. B&W are really fatiguing.

[@yongsangan2434]

705 is winner. More wide & sharpen.

[@lowrider007007]

The 705's will work well in a dampened room with plush furnishings, carpeted, soft sofa, draps etc, remember your not only listening to your speaker, but your room, that plays a crucial part in terms which speakers you should choose, I love B&W but would not want the 705 in a sparse modern lounge with wood flooring.

[@davidharrelson]

Definitely bw

[@robinkleinsteuber5217]

Not really hot to trot about either. It made me muse with delight that if both were driven by a good tube amp, I'd prefer the B&W with EL34 output tubes, and the KEF with KT88 output tubes, reiterating, using the SAME tube amp! The "sonic flavour" of each combo would be then tonally complimentary! The sound would certainly be smoother, more like honey, for both options also. The only downfall would be somewhat less sense of extended or super-defined bottom end, but both speakers would benefit with a subwoofer anyway, even with solid state amps.

[@constantin58]

most of the comments have ridiculous levels of KEF bias ))