Ed Selley
Hi-Fi Editor
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2003
- Messages
- 12,046
- Reaction score
- 5,498
- Points
- 3,077
- Age
- 43
That's so funnyThe other thing is the finish itself, as while I realise the picture probably doesn’t do them justice, they look like they have been built in somebody’s back shed and then sprayed all over with black paint, (Drivers as well)
Bill
I'm intrigued by the option of using the Q50s as surrounds. Did you get a chance to try them in that configuration?
Good looking system. I would suggest that you bring the 650 forward so that it is sitting proud of the cabinet's edge. I think you will be surprised at the improvement in dialogue.Well I’ve had a more customised setup since September set up in an average lounge. I have the Q750’s with a Q650c at the front, but I’ve used 4 KEF T101’s at the back and installed 4 Ci160QR’s in the ceiling. I also got a Velodyne SPL-1200 ultra subwoofer. I was worried that the T101’s would be a bit weak for surrounds but they hold their own and create a richer than expected rear surround stage. I think you need four T101’s to make it work.
Initially, I was a bit nervous that I had overdone it but the end result was beyond expectations. The Q750’s are excellent with music and filmtracks alike. In stereo mode I had to check that the rear speakers were off since I could hear sound behind and around me but in was just the Q750’s. The dispersion of the Q series is ideal for Atmos/DTS:x. Also, the Q650c is amazing with dialogue clear even in the loudest of action scenes. So here are some pictures of my setup.
View attachment 950046 View attachment 950047 View attachment 950048
As with the R50 which matches all speakers in the R Series so the Q50 will do the same for the Q range right from the Q150 to the Q950. Looking at photographs and knowing that the Q350 is only slightly smaller than my R300s I would say the Q50 has an almost identical size as the current R50s which look very neat when stood on top of any of the R range. I'm not fussed on the matt black effect of the new Q range.Lol if you have to explain why it doesn’t look right it will never get the wife acceptance factor. Lost at the first hurdle. Or worse, it will downsize the speaker package if it only matches the entry level speaker.
They were shown with some pretty small standmount speakers and still didn’t blend in.
Anyway just my opinion.
Am I the only seeing these huge gaps on top? Odd.As with the R50 which matches all speakers in the R Series so the Q50 will do the same for the Q range right from the Q150 to the Q950. Looking at photographs and knowing that the Q350 is only slightly smaller than my R300s I would say the Q50 has an almost identical size as the current R50s which look very neat when stood on top of any of the R range. I'm not fussed on the matt black effect of the new Q range.
I'm with you now. You mean that apart from the Q150s then they are not symmetrical with other speakers and show a gap all around. That's exactly the same with the R Series, a perfect fit on the R100s and R500s but with the gap on the rest of the range. I, strangly perhaps, prefer it as they seem more stable. It was if when combined with R100s it made the whole thing too tall and narrow when mounted on my cabinet, much prefer the look on R300s.Am I the only seeing these huge gaps on top? Odd.
1. The limited amount of Atmos soundtracks available, I'll only do it when there's a lot more native tracks available.
I use R50s and at present I have 14 Atmos or DTS:X titles in my collection as well as three series of Game of Thrones which have outstanding Atmos effects. However it is the added dimension in sound that the two upmixing modes bring to the soundstage that makes the addition of Atmos speakers in whatever position such a bonus. I believe the bubble of sound produced by a 5.1.2 far outweights a base 5.1, which seems flat in comparison and well worth the sacrifice of a bi-amp front pair.As far as upfiring speakers go I quite like the look of the Q50a and R50. I'm contemplating a 5.1.2 set up for the future with the Q50a as it would be easy to implement (just would also need an Atmos receiver and connect Q50a's to the surround back terminals). I've noticed nowhere seems to have the Q50a in stock at the moment.
I have a smallish room size (more wide than deep at 2.7m x 5.5m) and a low ceiling so should make use of upfiring speakers better than overhead which might be too localised. The only thing putting me off is
1. The limited amount of Atmos soundtracks available, I'll only do it when there's a lot more native tracks available.
2. I would lose bi-amping the fronts which I've always quite liked.
But you can still use the Dolby Surround & DTS Neural:X up-mixers with basically any movie you want, so the upfiring speakers wouldn`t go waste in any way. Quite the opposite from what i have read as using either one (DSU or X) will bring some movies alive like never before. I don`t have personal experience, but people seems to love those and wouldn`t go back to 5.1/7.1 anymore.
"Dolby Surround excels at spacial recreation and voice placement. It's more refined and delicate. If you feel as though you need more oomph overhead, DTS:Neural:X is a little louder and I also enjoyed the way it panned aggressive sound effects. "
Up-mixed: Dolby Surround v DTS:Neural:X | High-Def Digest
I use R50s and at present I have 14 Atmos or DTS:X titles in my collection as well as three series of Game of Thrones which have outstanding Atmos effects. However it is the added dimension in sound that the two upmixing modes bring to the soundstage that makes the addition of Atmos speakers in whatever position such a bonus. I believe the bubble of sound produced by a 5.1.2 far outweights a base 5.1, which seems flat in comparison and well worth the sacrifice of a bi-amp front pair.
Have the q series atmos speakers on order. Kef has them in stock but there waiting for the press release which is very soon. Expected to get them within 2 weeks. Look forward to see how they sound.