[Sound Battle] KEF R3 vs KEF Q350 Bookshelf Speakers w/Arcam SA10 Integrated Amp

I always thank you for your support! and being with me.
Please share your thoughts with me.
thanks
Other sound comparison videos
Amps - • Amplifier Sound Demo
Speakers - • Hi Fi Speakers Sound Demo
Bluetooth Speakers - • Bluetooth Speaker
Timecodes
0:00 - intro
1:11 - All the way up / Electronic / by Hadar Sopher
1:51 - Bedroom / Soul & RnB, Pop / by Raquel Castro, The Wildcardz
2:34 - Boost Your Power / Rock / by CustomMelody
3:32 - Chemtrails / Cinematic / by Semo
4:23 - Get Ready / Cinematic, Rock, Pop / by Midnight Noise
5:13 - Higher Love / Electronic, Pop / by Ben Fox
6:29 - Is Leroy On It / Jazz, Acoustic, Retro / by Southside Aces
7:27 - Pull Me Closer / Electronic, Pop, Hip Hop / by WEARETHEGOOD,
8:40 - Punkd / Cinematic, Electronic / by Out of Flux
9:41 - Seasons / Cinematic, Classical / by ANBR
10:51 - Star Night / Acoustic, Rock, Pop / Wonderland
11:41 - Time Traveling / Soul & RnB / Sarah Kang feat. Anthony Lazaro
13:15 - Crash and burn / Death Metal / Kissing Candice
14:40 - Magic Show / Death Metal / Kissing Candice
15:37 - Fields / Acoustic Guitar / Livio Bartolo

[@DougMen1]

I think we all owe E Project a real eternal debt of gratitude, for allowing those of us that can't afford any of this stuff to live vicariously through him and pretend what it would be like to own all this awesome gear

[@eprojectEllie]

thank you so much!!!

[@m.moreira3969]

Well said!!!

[@dmitrygud8137]

Yesss!!

[@aleph0909]

@eprojectEllie I agree! It helps a lot. So thank you. But please, please change the way it is done. The sequences of songs have to be the same for both speakers.

[@snakeobias]

Just bought myself a set of Q350s, and relatively cheap as well! My first pair of "audiophile" speakers. I can't wait to set them up and break them in. Thanks for all of your videos e-Project, I'm looking forward to future demos!

[@34332]

You did well, congratz! For the sometimes ridiculous discounts it's surely a no brainer. What amp are you driving them?

[@williammiebach1798]

Yes, Congrat's and Enjoy! Break'em in gently. 🙂

[@snakeobias]

@@34332 well I was tossing up between these and a pair of Evo 4.2s at about double the price. I've never been able to demo a pair of the 4.2s so I didn't want to risk it and went with the very decent Q350s. But while looking through other auctions, I noticed a few pairs of Evo 4.4s sold for equivalent of US$1200 a few months before I was looking - I would have grabbed those in an instant. I'm using an Onkyo A-9010 to drive them

[@34332]

@@snakeobias The Onkyo got some raving reviews, proving that a 'budget' amp can deliver lots of details and dynamics. Nice one. I'll bet it pairs well with the 350's. You mentioned the EVO 4.2's. Altough a terrific speaker, main disadvantage is they have that narrow, almost fixed, sweetspot. A bit too high or low can ruin the sound easily. Positioning can be tricky, where the 350's are much more forgiving. Anyway, enjoy your setup! 👍

[@snakeobias]

@@34332 Thanks for the insight. My Onkyo was my first "real amp", so I needed a budget amp to go with my TT. I think it will do nicely until I upgrade. As for that "sweet spot" issue you mention - that was the reason I opted out, at the las minute. Will be moving in about half a year and have no idea on what the room set up will be like. I probably should have waited, but I think the Q350s are a good option for the time being. Maybe a little "veiled", but not a problem. Gives me time to save for some Elysians or Quad Z-2s. Thanks for your words!

[@timtrillwood5768]

I have Q350's and love them!

[@williammiebach1798]

Also, nice lighting E-Project. The video looks great without the sparkely graphics. The equipment looks cooler and becomes the focus, wich is fine for us gear lovin' tech heads. The acoustic panels and everything gives a 'means business" impression, and the demo quality backs it up. 👌

[@eprojectEllie]

Cool, thanks!

[@romiegumayagay8899]

thank you E Project, always watch your excellent comparisons!! got the Q350 & Q750, then thinking on the R3, but then R3 metas came along.. more superior sound stage,[as it should be] not to forget to mention price wise, got this beauties too..Q Acoustics 3050i & Q A Concept 40, what's your take on them versus the kef's. would love to hear your opinion, perhaps from your other subscribers too!.

[@danielbrrio]

Very impressive subs for Q350!

[@thomasward00]

Great video, wish you could test the Paradigm 200B......

[@Utahraptor110]

Nice comparison! There’s definitely a jump from the q350 to the r3. Could you do an r3 vs ubr62 or ubr62 vs q350? Thanks!

[@RockCity1111]

Three way shoot out with the Polk R 200s?

[@DougMen1]

Wow! Thanks for this comparison, and for removing the flat screen, but that did the Q350 no favors. It actually benefitted from the reflections from the TV, and sounds less clear and more veiled now. On the jazz piece, for instance, the lead trumpet has lost the brassiness to the sound that it should have, and sounds a little duller than in the last video. The R3 is clearly better, and sounds like it should now, without the damaged woofer and midrange drivers the first pair sufffered from. Job well done E Project! Now we have to eventually hear the R3 and R200 with a Cambridge AXR, and the R3 compared to the Meta and R200. The R3 appears to be the new speaker king here, as well it should, being the most expensive one we've heard here, except for the B&W 705, which, IMO, is flawed compared to the R3 and Meta. But, I think the mighty R200 will come very close to the R3 in a head to head comparison, and at less than half the price

[@williammiebach1798]

The Q350's do sound a bit dry now, but don't forget how laid back in the mids the SA10 is. The mids wil be more forward with other amps and some of that presence will return, in a more natural way. Like them or not, their smoother here and closer to how they actualy sound without the TV.

[@user-nd5vi2ts2s]

is the arcam sa10 sufficient for pushing bass with the r3 and r3 metas or do i need the extra power from the sa20?

[@34332]

Nice demo E. Somehow the R3's sound much better vs last time. To me it's clear the R3 is the best performer here. Great dynamics, clean midrange and slightly rolled off top-end. This top-end was disliked by many 'true' KEF enthusiasts, but to me it serves it well. For what it is, the 350's are good, but didn't convince me in this battle. Although I love the R200's, I don't think they can match the R3's.

[@DougMen1]

The last pair was an open box pair that someone obviously had returned after damaging the woofers and midrange drivers. Crutchfield should have tested them before selling them again and they should have never tried to sell them again to someone else. That puts their integrity and credibility in question, and knowing now that they don't check returns before selling them again, I would never buy any speaker (or anything else) from them that wasn't in a new sealed box.

[@34332]

@@DougMen1 Obviously there was something quite off in the other R3 demo (frogs included 😄). At least now we (I) know why. Too bad and scandelous to send out speakers like that (non check'd). It does say a lot on how serious a company takes their customers. I heard this speakers some time ago, very impressive (because not as clinical as the LS50 series sometimes can be. They require some fiddling in positioning and space (and a good amp). Unfortunatly too steep for my wallet at that time. If possible, audition them for real (based on your taste in your comments). They project a 3D soundstage like there's no tomorrow 😄 Thanks for the heads-up!

[@davidcarr2216]

Great job E. The Q350s are still very good all-round loudspeakers and good enough for many but LS50 Metas are more refined and focussed , especially on vocals in real listening. The R3s are hard to beat in medium to larger rooms with suitable amps but for vocal lovers, the Metas may still be preferable.

[@williammiebach1798]

Awesome! Thank"s ever so much E-Project, for taking the flatscreen out of the equation. I think we get a purer demonstation of these speakers true sound here. These R3's sound far better than in the prior comparison, not only because of the clean acoustics, but because they are clearly not broken. In fact they sound far more integrated and balanced, with less of the response dip between the mid and bass drivers than before. They definately give their less costly siblings more than a challenge here with brighter, more detailed mids, and a larger, more open and energetric presentation. At tripple the price, I would say they certainly are better in some ways than the Q350, but for me it's more that they just have a different sonic flavor. Subjectively for me the 350's sound more integrated, warmer and more full bodied in the midrange, and are suprisingly close in bass response. I agree and disagree with DM about them lacking presence on the brass instruments for instance, without the TV's reflections. They and other speakers will present with less midrange accentuation now, and with greater soundstage depth, but to me they sound smoother, more coherent and balanced now. In short, I think they are reproducing a more accurate reproduction of the recording. To me the Q350's have their own individual charictor, but still hold their own against the Metas and R3's of their family, but the R3's look cooler, especialy in black.

[@DougMen1]

Looking at JA's measurements of the 350s from the review of them at Stereophile, I see they have a broad dip of about 2db between 3 and 10khz, centered at around 4-5khz, and then slowly rising again above that up to 10khz and then with about a 2db rise in response from 10-20khz, half of which my old ears won't hear, because they top off at 15khz. But that dip is right in the presence region, and is I guess why they now sound a bit lacking in clarity and a little bit veiled to me compared to the R200 and Metas, without the boost in those frequencies that the reflections off the screen provided them. That is, however, in the near field, which is also how they're mic'd here, and JA's measurements also show exemplary horizontal and vertical dispersion from them, with very little falloff off axis, some of the best I've seen from any speaker at any price, and that will fill in that dip in the overall in room response, which is why they sound clearer and brighter in samples where they are mic'd further away

[@williammiebach1798]

@@DougMen1 Havn't seen the charts for them, but my ears have told me they absolurely have a dip in the presence region, but I think a slight rise on either side, in both the lower to center mids, somewhere between 500 hz to 1khz, and a rise in treble above 7 to 10khz., yeah. The lower midrange may sound slightly less pronounced now, but the presence region, wich can't afford to lose anything, has definately lost something. They do sound comparitively dry and a bit veiled now next to the much more presency R3's. Some of it could be the amp, but maybe not much, and yes your right, in demos where they arent miked as closely, and room interaction is present, they don't sound so dry. The R200"s have less center mids than the 350's mids but also are lacking a bit in the presence region, and the UB52's are a bit too forward in the presence region but should be more ballanced with this set up. I'm hoping he'll try another amp soon, and do a comparison with the UB52 and the R100's. I'm still not sure exactly what the R100's sound like.

[@34332]

I'm not sure this amp is quite suited for the R3's. If you pair them with a 'warmer' amp, they really shine (scale up well too), but I do get your point re. flavor. One thing I noted also, when hearing them for real, is that the bass is somewhat disconnected from the mids. Some say it's because of the cone material, not sure, but it's mentioned frequently in reviews too. Dynamics and bass are off the wall btw, incredible fast, something you can't really extract from the demo. Still, you have to put some big $$ into gear to get it right, which makes the 350 a more than interesting alternative.

[@williammiebach1798]

@@34332 Yeah, I agree they would bennefit from warmer, more full bodied amplfication. They probably would sound pretty good with my vintage NAD seperates wich are just that. Alas, I'm not buying them. There is somewhat of a disconnect between the mids and woofers to me, even in this demo. I don't know if it's due to the nature of the aluminum drivers. The Elac UB52's use aluminum midrange and bass drivers, and they seem to transition pretty smoothly, so my guess it's the crossover or something else, but who knows. Anyway, I'd say it's there.

[@DougMen1]

@@williammiebach1798 I agree, they do look better in black, and they would probably sound HUGE with a big fat warm sounding McIntosh. They always make good speakers sound even more real and less artificial, IMO. They're one of the companies whose amps always make music sound more real and less like a Hi-Fi recreation to me

[@hrvojekant9415]

R 3 like Q 350 but without curtain in front of drivers

[@matthewkaptena9512]

The difference isn't as big as I expected. Think I'll stick with the Q series for now.

[@timtrillwood5768]

Me too!

[@paulhanlon5112]

Both have the KEF house sound (clear a little reserved) the Q350 give a good account of themselves but the better engineering of the R3 is obvious!

[@ah.l]

some compare psb xb vs q350

[@herrtrigger7220]

Serious visible cone movement on Q350 during Punkd. No movement on the R3 that I could detect.

[@user-rr4rn3gs9m]

Kef q350

[@zeppzepp1234]

good quality with compromise design vs compromise quality with good design. R3 no doubt is superior to Q350, but I can’t stand the 3way design in such a small speaker. l like the more relaxing Q350 character, but the bad resonance making it sounding vague.

[@DougMen1]

The R3s are actually a lot bigger than they appear here

[@zeppzepp1234]

@@DougMen1 I would like to see even bigger woofer in it but it’s not applicable in this thin enclosure trend. 3 way floorstander has better integration choices.

[@williammiebach1798]

I don't think I hear audible cabinette resonance from the Q350's, but their could be some. I think it's more a voicing thing with them. I also feel a well engineered two way design has advantages over a three way one in some ways. 3 ways are even harder to get right Both the R3's and Elac UB52's, though good in some ways, suffer a bit from the pitfalls of a three way design. The Evo 4.2 certainly does. Few 2 ways are nearly pefect either though.

[@zeppzepp1234]

@@williammiebach1798 Neither will be perfect. 2 way stand-mount is far more cost effective. Simpler design in recent years can achieve very good result. But, the competition is too high when anybody can make good speakers, the marketing strategy bringing the spotlight to special designs, materials….if you don’t learn how to tell good stories, nothing can be sold….

[@eubikedude]

Toed in = bright? Especially near-field I imagine.

[@54tristin]

They both sound like my ipad😂

[@MooksyNZ]

R3 sounds too sibilant to me, testing on quality headphones.

[@ah.l]

r3 over q350 is no brainer

[@timtrillwood5768]

Yeh but , I'm 67 and my journey started with infinity QA's and with my Yamaha RX797, 100rms /channel, fantastic! the Kef's are fantastic, had a pair of q150's for a year prior to buying the 350's, 350's are cheap R3's, q150's cheap LS50's

[@LYNXHQ]

One is 1500 quid more expensive

[@higobatman]

As R3 são bem difíceis de serem empurradas. Igual as KEF LS50. Precisa de um amplificador bem melhor para mostrar o seu potencial. Pelo menos um NAD C388, Arcam SA30. Marantz Model 30. The R3s are pretty hard to push. Same as KEF LS50. You need a much better amplifier to show your potential. At least one NAD C388, Arcam SA30. Marantz Model 30.

[@williammiebach1798]

If your'e spending at least $1700 US on speakers, you should have a strong, high quality amp first.

[@higobatman]

@@williammiebach1798 Exactly. The same is true for the $1,500 LS50 Goal. Many people who have purchased Original LS50s or Targets have not heard their true potential due to using weak amps for them. KEFS are very difficult boxes to be pushed. Only the Q line that are friendlier. KEF R300, R3, LS50, LS50 Meta, Reference 1 and etc... need quality amplification.

[@streamcnoremorse3323]

What amp do you use? Some recommend Hegel H190. Best I ve heard in showroom was MF6si

[@higobatman]

@@streamcnoremorse3323 Amplifiers that look good with the KEF LS50 Meta are the Rotel A11 Tribute, NAD C388, Marantz Model 30, Arcam SA30, Yamaha A-S2200, Roksan Blak, Cambridge Evo 150, Accuphase E-270.

[@streamcnoremorse3323]

@@higobatman Rotel 11? Seriously? I ve heard 1592 with Denton and it was not good. OK. So Purifi Eigentack would be nice anyway (NAD C298)