KEF 104.2: still great after all these years! [Archive]

Sealed

03-14-2004, 03:47 AM

Kef 104.2 preliminary review
http://www.kef.com/kefimages/image237.gif

Description: D’appolito design mid/tweet/mid (MTM) with twin 8” woofers in a coupled chamber. 4th order advanced crossover.

Frequency response: 55hz-22khz +/- 2db. In room: about 30hz-22khz.

Efficiency: 92 db 1w/1 meter

Impedence: 4 ohms

Built from 1980’s… about 1987

Dimensions: 35.5” x 11 x 16.4 in 70.5 lbs each.

Original price 1986: about $2700 USD, extra for exotic finishes

Technology comments. This speaker is a timeless classic of accurate detail, dynamics and musical ability. The reason behind this is that KEF poured tons of money and engineering into it’s products from the 70’s and 80’s. The 103.x,104.x,105.x and 107.x were factory matched within 1db accuracy of factory reference. The box is miter type, excellently braced and very solid. The designers last product for KEF was the 105/4. After that product, KEF went on a downhill spiral. Even the new reference series are not as well engineered as the 10X.X era was. If these speakers were engineered and built like this now, you’d not be able to touch them for under $8k- $12k.

Tweeter: they are accurate and flat up to 22khz, matched within 0.5 db of each other. Model: T33 1" Impregnated fabric dome

Midranges: in MTM configuration they blend perfectly. Very holographic and detailed. The tweeter and mids are mounted on the front of the speaker in their own separate enclosure. Totally isolated from the woofer. 2 x 5" doped bextrene

Woofers: They are chamber loaded (meaning they are not ported, rather two push-pull drivers firing into a chamber that is open to the front. No coloration or noise is induced. The two woofers are coupled via force restoring rod. The bass is fast, tight, and very deep. 2 x 8" paper

Crossover: 4th order, built with tight tolerance components mounted on damped legs. This crossover is very complex, and includes baffle step, time and phase adjustments. May work with the Kef Universal Bass Equalizer (KUBE) to optimize bass below 100hz. Not required, but does enhance performance.

I found these in superior, ultra clean condition. I am the 2nd owner, and they are in a Rosewood finish. I paid $950.

Are these speakers perfect? Don’t ask that, no speaker is. Do these speakers deliver a huge, holographic, fast, rock-solid image with excellent impact, dynamics and low coloration? YES.

These speakers have been around, and are sought after and well loved. They do not take a back seat to any comparable sized speaker made now. They are on equal footing, if not less colored and more detailed than the Mighty Proac response 2.5.

What you can expect is a linear sounding speaker with great punch low enough that for 90% of music a sub isn’t necessary. These speakers like a good amount of solid state current. These speakers are revealing of very fine nuances, but are never sterile or analytical. They carry a tune with articulation and grace.

I know that Kef’s earlier work in the 70’s could be considered very colored, and polite. These are not like that at all. These could easily be used to master recordings, but they are not dry and lifeless like some monitor speakers can be.

I can without reservation say that these were made in Kef’s real heyday. They were privately and critically acclaimed, along with the 103.2,3,4 105.2,3,4 and 107. They are deserving of lofty praise indeed. With a competent front end, these will not sound was “romantic” or “slow” or “colored” as Kef has been accused of being. I would attribute those characterizations to the electronics and source of the day.

These speakers belong in an audio hall of fame, they are among the very best speakers made. They have no glaring faults, and the better the front end, the better they sound. Anyone looking for a great investment for around $1k, get a set of 104/2’s. long term owners will gladly corroborate how excellent these speakers were, and still are.

oplancq

04-08-2004, 04:00 AM

[U][B]
These speakers belong in an audio hall of fame, they are among the very best speakers made. They have no glaring faults, and the better the front end, the better they sound. Anyone looking for a great investment for around $1k, get a set of 104/2’s. long term owners will gladly corroborate how excellent these speakers were, and still are.

Hello,
I also own some KEF 104/2. Bought those last year for 500 USD. They have a terrific soundstage and they are preety revealing of the rest of the system. Bad records are something to avoid !
Only fault is the medium 1KHz - 2.5KHz: this region is laid back; But they are terrific for the price I paid.

Olivier

Sealed

04-08-2004, 04:32 AM

Hello,
I also own some KEF 104/2. Bought those last year for 500 USD. They have a terrific soundstage and they are preety revealing of the rest of the system. Bad records are something to avoid !
Only fault is the medium 1KHz - 2.5KHz: this region is laid back; But they are terrific for the price I paid.

Olivier

Mine are of 1985-85 vintage and I am experiancing no such problem. It could be your choice of electronics or cabling.

My friend has some 103/3's and those are very similar: smooth, flat and even.

KEF measurments (KEF and independant) measure the 104/2 absolutely ruler flat from 55hz to 22khz, +/- 2 db. Nothing is recessed at all.

oplancq

04-08-2004, 05:09 AM

Mine are of 1985-85 vintage and I am experiancing no such problem. It could be your choice of electronics or cabling.

My friend has some 103/3's and those are very similar: smooth, flat and even.

KEF measurments (KEF and independant) measure the 104/2 absolutely ruler flat from 55hz to 22khz, +/- 2 db. Nothing is recessed at all.

I have tried several electronics, cables..always same result. In room measurement shows this region is slightly laid back. Mine are 1989 vintage.
Others 104/2 are showing same behaviour.

oplancq

04-08-2004, 05:27 AM

By the way if you have documentation on those speakers I'd be quiet interested...

Sealed

04-08-2004, 07:55 AM

By the way if you have documentation on those speakers I'd be quiet interested...

Suddenly you have many pairs of 104/2's in which you have measured the same thing? I find that dubious at best. Just suddenly you have access to many of them in a group test?

The kef literature is exact.

The 104.2 like to be *precisely* 50cm from back walls. Deviations of more than 1/4" are too much. They also must be 1 meter from side walls.

The speaker cables must not be more than .2ohms...period.

I have reason to believe that the 104/2 you have (1989) are NOT the same as the 1984-1987 version at all. Different drivers (like uni-q) and a different designer. The designer responsible for the whole batch was no longer at KEF after 1987.

It is entirely possible that your year 104/2 is totally different from mine.

It is a 100% certianty that mine do not exhibit any deviations in playback spectrum as you have stated.

oplancq

04-08-2004, 01:01 PM

Suddenly you have many pairs of 104/2's in which you have measured the same thing? I find that dubious at best. Just suddenly you have access to many of them in a group test?

The kef literature is exact.

The 104.2 like to be *precisely* 50cm from back walls. Deviations of more than 1/4" are too much. They also must be 1 meter from side walls.

The speaker cables must not be more than .2ohms...period.

I have reason to believe that the 104/2 you have (1989) are NOT the same as the 1984-1987 version at all. Different drivers (like uni-q) and a different designer. The designer responsible for the whole batch was no longer at KEF after 1987.

It is entirely possible that your year 104/2 is totally different from mine.

It is a 100% certianty that mine do not exhibit any deviations in playback spectrum as you have stated.

Who said I had several pairs of 104/2 ??? I did not...But I know several people who heard different 104/2 in different rooms, and most agreed that high medium was slightly laid back...
Don't get me wrong...I love my KEFs but I'm realistic: they are not perfect.
Mine are from 1989 and are true 104/2 same design: T33/B110/B200 (SP3037). No Uni Q driver..But you migh be right that crossovers from 1984 are different.
Funny, just measured the distance from the back wall: 52 cms !

Olivier.

Sealed

04-08-2004, 11:42 PM

Who said I had several pairs of 104/2 ??? I did not...But I know several people who heard different 104/2 in different rooms, and most agreed that high medium was slightly laid back...
Don't get me wrong...I love my KEFs but I'm realistic: they are not perfect.
Mine are from 1989 and are true 104/2 same design: T33/B110/B200 (SP3037). No Uni Q driver..But you migh be right that crossovers from 1984 are different.
Funny, just measured the distance from the back wall: 52 cms !

Olivier.

It's always funny how people suddenly have a committee consensus when they post something dubious. IE: "I just surveyed six dozen of my local KEF 104/2 owners group and..." not to mention the error I made by providing some setup information beforehand. That taints the thread. Now you can just repeat my setup instructions and claim you have a $100,000 front end and the proper setup with Techtronix and HP sound meters confirming some kind of recessed frequency band. I will not do that again...
Note to self: ask first... compare second.

There are only four explanations for your findings.

1. The Kef you own are different internally than the 84-1987 run

2. Room placement is off- they are too close to something

3. The cables and electronics you have are wrong/inadequate. What are they btw? source, amp, preamp, cables?

4. You have a set that was defective.

The pair I have (which is indicative of the 84-87 line) is ruler flat, and not recessed at all. What you are experiancing is not the way these KEF sound...at all.

oplancq

04-11-2004, 02:13 AM

It's always funny how people suddenly have a committee consensus when they post something dubious. IE: "I just surveyed six dozen of my local KEF 104/2 owners group and..." not to mention the error I made by providing some setup information beforehand. That taints the thread. Now you can just repeat my setup instructions and claim you have a $100,000 front end and the proper setup with Techtronix and HP sound meters confirming some kind of recessed frequency band. I will not do that again...
Note to self: ask first... compare second.

There are only four explanations for your findings.

1. The Kef you own are different internally than the 84-1987 run

2. Room placement is off- they are too close to something

3. The cables and electronics you have are wrong/inadequate. What are they btw? source, amp, preamp, cables?

4. You have a set that was defective.

The pair I have (which is indicative of the 84-87 line) is ruler flat, and not recessed at all. What you are experiancing is not the way these KEF sound...at all.

Mine are from1989. I also believe the cross over is different. Mine are certainly not defective !
I have a review made by a french magazine "Revue du son - 1985". Frequency curves are clearly showing a slightly ascending curve from medium to high frequency....Do you want a copy ?
Anyway, who cares...if they sound good to you...

Olivier

oplancq

04-11-2004, 02:15 AM

It's always funny how people suddenly have a committee consensus when they post something dubious. IE: "I just surveyed six dozen of my local KEF 104/2 owners group and..." not to mention the error I made by providing some setup information beforehand. That taints the thread. Now you can just repeat my setup instructions and claim you have a $100,000 front end and the proper setup with Techtronix and HP sound meters confirming some kind of recessed frequency band. I will not do that again...
Note to self: ask first... compare second.

There are only four explanations for your findings.

1. The Kef you own are different internally than the 84-1987 run

2. Room placement is off- they are too close to something

3. The cables and electronics you have are wrong/inadequate. What are they btw? source, amp, preamp, cables?

4. You have a set that was defective.

The pair I have (which is indicative of the 84-87 line) is ruler flat, and not recessed at all. What you are experiancing is not the way these KEF sound...at all.

I also believe crossovers of 1989 versions are different..
I do have review made by "Revue du Son 1985". The frequency curve is showing a ascending trend from medium to high frequency...Maybe yours are different..
But who cares...if they sound good to you...

Olivier

Sealed

04-11-2004, 03:50 AM

I also believe crossovers of 1989 versions are different..
I do have review made by "Revue du Son 1985". The frequency curve is showing a ascending trend from medium to high frequency...Maybe yours are different..
But who cares...if they sound good to you...

Olivier

Actually, I note you failed to list your components. What are you afraid of? This is very relevant.

Just because you thread-crapped by posting a charactaristic that has nothing to do with KEF from 84-87 I wondered how you ascertained this. I have experiance with KEF going back to 1986, and again, I have not heard post-1987 models.

Seems like you are more interested in trolling, than the truth.

But again, "revue du son" wasn't exactly a great pub. The KEF that made it to the states could have also been voiced differently. The is no ascencion, as per a KEF tech I just talked to thursday. Maybe you can post this review online.

I think that you have problems related to your system, the year (possibly the biwire ) version.)

I am listening in a room that is concrete all the way around. All the spl measurements (swept tone and pink noise) I have taken corroborate KEF's measurements. There is no "decline" to be heard or measured.

oplancq

04-11-2004, 04:09 AM

Actually, I note you failed to list your components. What are you afraid of? This is very relevant.

Just because you thread-crapped by posting a charactaristic that has nothing to do with KEF from 84-87 I wondered how you ascertained this. I have experiance with KEF going back to 1986, and again, I have not heard post-1987 models.

Seems like you are more interested in trolling, than the truth.

But again, "revue du son" wasn't exactly a great pub. The KEF that made it to the states could have also been voiced differently. The is no ascencion, as per a KEF tech I just talked to thursday. Maybe you can post this review online.

I think that you have problems related to your system, the year (possibly the biwire ) version.)

I am listening in a room that is concrete all the way around. All the spl measurements (swept tone and pink noise) I have taken corroborate KEF's measurements. There is no "decline" to be heard or measured.

- "revue du son" is a French mag (by the way I don't believe it's allowed to post publications). The mag of this period was excellent. And the report is based on 1985 version where this characteristic is obvious on the curve..
- my speakers are European version made in 1989. So not the RC biwire version produced quiet later..
- Of course KEF people are going to pretend, they have flat speakers...What were you expecting ? I suppose they pretend KEF 107 is flat...go and check measurement from Stereophile...
- Rest of my gear (actual): Pre: Atoll PR100, VTL 75, Rega Planet 2000, ART DI/O, Rega P3, Golring 1022, Gram AMP 2, CC89259 à la Jon Risch. What about yours ?
- I'm quiet surprised you have a flat measurement in a concrete room ???

Seems to me you are more interested in persuading your self and others that your speakers are perfect than in the truth....
By the way in you first post, you mention those were not perfect speakers...so according to you what are the weaknesses ???
You also mentioned some independant measurment, can you share those ??

But as you mention, your speakers might be different...Just wanted to share my findings on "others" 104/2. This is what a forum is made for.

Thanks

By the way, did I mention I just love my KEFs but I try to stay realistic. And I also believe it's pretty hard to find a better pair of speakers below 1K...

Sealed

04-11-2004, 05:31 AM

[QUOTE=oplancq]- - my speakers are European version made in 1989. So not the RC biwire version produced quiet later..

How? they stopped production. That makes no sense to have a biwire after production halts.

- Of course KEF people are going to pretend, they have flat speakers...What were you expecting ? I suppose they pretend KEF 107 is flat...go and check measurement from Stereophile...
They meaning we? So, it is revealed your whole purpose here is definately to thread crap. It is to try to slander KEF into saying they are all recessed as you state.

- Rest of my gear (actual): Pre: Atoll PR100, VTL 75, Rega Planet 2000, ART DI/O, Rega P3, Golring 1022, Gram AMP 2, CC89259 à la Jon Risch. What about yours ?

Ah ha! Nice an euphonically colored tubes! So you like distortion! Sounds like a very relaxed and laid back system.

- I'm quiet surprised you have a flat measurement in a concrete room ???

yes. Much better than a wooden room.

Seems to me you are more interested in persuading your self and others that your speakers are perfect than in the truth....
--No, they are just not as flawed as you trolled.

Why don't you just admit the whole reason for you to post here is to crap on my thread, lie about KEF (by painting all of them with your false findings.)

All you are doing is attempting to rain dicredit based upon your findings in your laid back, euphonic system. The kef sounds the way they do because of your obviously colored system.

Let break it down:

VTL 75: not a lot of power here, can sound slow on a lot of speakers. Also can sound bloomy and colored.

REGA p3/RB300/Goldring. nice beginner deck. Lacks tonality, I just set up a deck like that. could really use a better cart. A bit cool and lifeless as is.

Rega planet 2000: nice budget cd player. Does not have ambient recovery like a better cd player. lacks impact, but a nice, polite, pleasent soundling laid back player. it will never offend, because it errs on this side of omission.

So, you are talking about flaws in a speaker...with a flawed system. Not exactly a good reference platform for judging. You should upgrade before making such a call.

oplancq

04-11-2004, 01:21 PM

How? they stopped production. That makes no sense to have a biwire after production halts.

.
This is a typical pathetic answer from somebody unable to argue anymore:
KEF stopped production of 104/2 after 1990 ??? Ridiculous. KEF was still selling biwire version of 104/2 in early 90's: R Cook version. Unless KEF website is wrong...
Me trying to slander KEF ? Are you kidding, I said I love them (also have some 104aB). Just said high medium was laid back. This is easily proven with independent review...False findings ??? no just facts !
About my system: I was sure you were going to come with such cheap arguments.
VTL: lacking power? This proves you are not familiar with this amp.... Lacking finesse maybe. Slightly colored in the bass, low medium. Yes. Also had some Audio Analogue Donizetti, Atoll AM100...This laid back high medium is more or less always there.
I think the KUBE was also equalizing the medium ? No ???
Rega Planet: just using this as a drive since I find this too polite. As mentioned, I’m using a DIO as a DAC.
Never said my system was perfectly neutral: gosh I’d hate that. But it’s good enough. The bottleneck is probably the 104/2.
You confirm you have a flat measurement in a concrete room? Well...I don’t believe you unless your room is treated.

Now your time to answer:
-Your system ?
- Reference of your independent reviews?
- If any what are 104/2 weaknesses ?

And stop calling me a troll...this is not the case and I hate that.

Sealed

04-12-2004, 12:02 AM

This is a typical pathetic answer from somebody unable to argue anymore:
KEF stopped production of 104/2 after 1990 ??? Ridiculous. KEF was still selling biwire version of 104/2 in early 90's: R Cook version. Unless KEF website is wrong...
Me trying to slander KEF ? Are you kidding, I said I love them (also have some 104aB). Just said high medium was laid back. This is easily proven with independent review...False findings ??? no just facts !
About my system: I was sure you were going to come with such cheap arguments.
VTL: lacking power? This proves you are not familiar with this amp.... Lacking finesse maybe. Slightly colored in the bass, low medium. Yes. Also had some Audio Analogue Donizetti, Atoll AM100...This laid back high medium is more or less always there.
I think the KUBE was also equalizing the medium ? No ???
Rega Planet: just using this as a drive since I find this too polite. As mentioned, I’m using a DIO as a DAC.
Never said my system was perfectly neutral: gosh I’d hate that. But it’s good enough. The bottleneck is probably the 104/2.
You confirm you have a flat measurement in a concrete room? Well...I don’t believe you unless your room is treated.

Now your time to answer:
-Your system ?
- Reference of your independent reviews?
- If any what are 104/2 weaknesses ?

And stop calling me a troll...this is not the case and I hate that.

Thanks for confirming all my assertions. You have a colored, bloomy system with a laid back presentation as I stated. The VTL isn't exactly a passlabs x-350 power wise, now is it? How does listening to transformers sound?

You admitted to me exactly what I suspected. You can cast rocks, at one thing, but when someone points out the obvious flaws in your system, and how colored and slow and bloomy it is then you get mad. I can't help it if you don't have a neutral reference in which to judge flat from. You perspective is obviously tainted by all that time listening to a soggy, bloomy warm and slow system.

My findings stand. The 104/2 are not harsh, rolled off, recessed, or heavily colored. But I have NO DOUBT in your system they sound slow and recessed.

oplancq

04-12-2004, 12:49 AM

Thanks for confirming all my assertions. You have a colored, bloomy system with a laid back presentation as I stated. The VTL isn't exactly a passlabs x-350 power wise, now is it? How does listening to transformers sound?

You admitted to me exactly what I suspected. You can cast rocks, at one thing, but when someone points out the obvious flaws in your system, and how colored and slow and bloomy it is then you get mad. I can't help it if you don't have a neutral reference in which to judge flat from. You perspective is obviously tainted by all that time listening to a soggy, bloomy warm and slow system.

My findings stand. The 104/2 are not harsh, rolled off, recessed, or heavily colored. But I have NO DOUBT in your system they sound slow and recessed.

Never said they were harsh, roll off, heavy colored...Only medium from 1Khz to 3KHz was slightly laidback. This is confirmed by measures from independant magazines.
I'm now sure you just have your opinion with you and are just able to make assumptions based on your system (which is probably very good)...But you cannot generalize...
My system is not bloomy warm and slow. Assesing that without listening proves you are just not objective...
Also you cannot compare power from valve and power from solid state amps. You should know that. My amp was measures at 110 W/8ohms and this is quiet enough to drive the KEFs.

I'm not getting mad. I love my system as it is. I just want to give a complete picture on this forum. YOU are mad when I come with facts stating your speakers are not as flat as you wish they should be...You are getting mad, but you have no objective facts with you. It is not possible to discuss with you as I could see in some of your others posts on this forum. You are just able to attack others systems: pathetic...

And don't forget to answer my other questions...

Sealed

04-12-2004, 01:11 AM

Never said they were harsh, roll off, heavy colored...Only medium from 1Khz to 3KHz was slightly laidback. This is confirmed by measures from independant magazines.
I'm now sure you just have your opinion with you and are just able to make assumptions based on your system (which is probably very good)...But you cannot generalize...
My system is not bloomy warm and slow. Assesing that without listening proves you are just not objective...
Also you cannot compare power from valve and power from solid state amps. You should know that. My amp was measures at 110 W/8ohms and this is quiet enough to drive the KEFs.

I'm not getting mad. I love my system as it is. I just want to give a complete picture on this forum. YOU are mad when I come with facts stating your speakers are not as flat as you wish they should be...You are getting mad, but you have no objective facts with you. It is not possible to discuss with you as I could see in some of your others posts on this forum. You are just able to attack others systems: pathetic...

And don't forget to answer my other questions...

No, actually your system is pathetic. You have proven again my assertion. You seem to think your system is perfect and beyond reproach. You are no more objective than anyone.

This thread has become irrelevent due to the fact you have not posted the so-called findings of said experts that measured the audible roll off.

The whole of your post in this thread was simply to crap on the idea that the 104/2 is in fact flat from 55hz to 22khz with no audible or measured recession. All the words you post will not change that fact.

My system:

An amp that is much more powerful than yours, faster and more neutral.
A cd player that is much more revealing than yours.
A turntable that is more expensive, revealing and musical than yours.

So what's the point? No matter what is posted at this point, it's all subjective.

You should have made your own thread entitled: "Why Kef 104/2's made after 1987 are audibly flawed"
and stayed out of mine.

oplancq

04-12-2004, 06:15 AM

No, actually your system is pathetic.

>> Thanks...You are again proving what I'm saying: you have no arguments..you are just able to base you judgements on stereotypes: tube is colored, expensive is good...

You have proven again my assertion. You seem to think your system is perfect and beyond reproach. You are no more objective than anyone.

>> Ridiculous...please read more carefully previous my previous posts...You are the one to pretend that..

This thread has become irrelevant due to the fact you have not posted the so-called findings of said experts that measured the audible roll off.

>> Yes. I'll find a way to publish the graphs from Revue du Son. Could you publish your doc. No, I'm sure you don't have any.

The whole of your post in this thread was simply to crap on the idea that the 104/2 is in fact flat from 55hz to 22khz with no audible or measured recession. All the words you post will not change that fact.

>>It's a fact. Does not mean they are bad speakers. I love mine. Any flat speaker in an anechoic room is not going to perform flat in one normal room anyway.

My system:

An amp that is much more powerful than yours, faster and more neutral.
A cd player that is much more revealing than yours.
A turntable that is more expensive, revealing and musical than yours.

>> Blablabla...Ridiculous arguments. You never heard my system. Did you already heard one good DIO ? No...More expensive does not mean better. You should know that. It's just a question of synergy of quality pieces.
Even if your system is better than mine. This is not the point of the discussion here

So what's the point? No matter what is posted at this point, it's all subjective.

>> Yes I will continue to enjoy my flawed system. I'm not pretending mine is perfect as you seem to have one: a perfect system in a perfect room. I have my doubts...

You should have made your own thread entitled: "Why Kef 104/2's made after 1987 are audibly flawed"
and stayed out of mine.
>> Could be that post 1987 are different...maybe...Curves from RDS are from 1985 though...
I really think that your place does not belong to a forum... A forum is a place where we try to share information. Not a place to insult people and impose his view.
I find highly suspect somebody who refuses to tell his system and refuses to answer others basic questions:
- weaknesses of the 104/2
- References of independent reviews you mention in the first post...

Text inserted in yours...

Too bad we don't have other inmates to comment on those speakers...On AA, we have more interesting opinions...

Sir Terrence the Terrible

04-12-2004, 03:26 PM

I have never seen so much ego and so many things get so personal. I know of only one speaker that exibits a ruler flat measurement in a normal room. The KEF isn't it. And in a concrete room, I have tremendous doubts you will get a ruler flat response because these rooms "contain" room resonaces and standing waves much easier than other building materials. 55hz low frequency limit does not make a full range speaker. IMO, and sub is absolutely necessary as this speaker would have a terrible time with the cannon shots of the 1812 overture, or the low bass from works like the Planets, or any organ music.

I cannot comment on the dip between 1-3khz. But the kind of response that you state sealed is usually found only in anechoic chambers.

Oliver, I have to give you props for you honesty. Not many people are very realistic in the assesment of their own speakers.

oplancq

04-12-2004, 10:46 PM

You speak for the whole of AA?

I know you are angry because you can't afford a better system that isn't so slow and highly colored.

Your opinion is a waste of bandwidth when you jump into a thread and crap all over it.

Not to mention your sadly euphonic and highly inaccurate budget system.

Sad, when you can't tell the difference between high end, and wanna-be.

Enjoy your distortion, and self righteous claptrap.

Feel free to post again when you have upgraded your electronics to something worthy.

"I know, my system, "...Woah...

I'm not angry, mad or jealous. I can certainly afford more expensive electonics. What is the point if they are not better to my ears. There are certainly better electronics than mine but so far I'm happy. I'm probably going to upgrade: certainly not the amp by the way...
IMHO more expensive does not mean better..I have heard tons of mega bucks systems: some of them were just pathetic: cold, analytical...beeurk.
The way you judge others systems is weird, the way you don't answer questions is suspect, the way you make judgements based on stereotypes is amusing. You seem pretty proud of your system but you are just not able to describe the way it sounds honestly. Looks like a poor listener behaviour...You seem to be able to judge high end just based on the price. Pathetic..This forum is not reserved to zillionaire systems...
The way you act just means you have no idear what a forum is all about.

oplancq

04-13-2004, 12:03 AM

no, poor listener behaviour is someone like you that buys second-rate crap that is heavily colored , slow and highly inaccurate and you think you are making accuracy calls.

It also sounds like you are proud of your cheap crap, and try to justify it thinking that it's huge flaws are high fidelity. That is very poor listener behaviour.

I have an "idear" this forum is about real hifi, not hyper-colored midfi trying to pass as high end.

Having a nice, slow, rolled off system that is obviously veiled and lacks details is a very poor reference.

Try to get some real gear, won't you? the cheap stuff you have is barely a notch over circuit city dreck.

ROTFLMAO!

VTL ? Second rate crap ? Arguments please; why it would not be appropriate to drive KEF 104/2 ! Cheap ? if you say so.....and who cares ? You continue to discuss price...That's your only argument ??? Pretty poor... When do you plan to answer the questions ? You seem pretty sure my system is colored (without listening!) but you are just not able to describe yours...Oh yes probably you have not decided yet which exceptional system you were owning...Sweet dreams...
Too bad this post is going nowhere since I agree with some of what you were saying: "104/2 still great after all this years..."

By the way, what means: "ROTFLMAO" ?

oplancq

04-13-2004, 01:38 AM

"The 104/2 bass extends easily into the middle of the 1st octave.": you must have a smallish listening room.
You still do not tell us more about your system ? Nor give reference of the independent reviews you mentioned.
Are you ashamed of your MF A3.2 (I was expecting something more expensive, more much powerful, apparently not the most neutral around...but never heard it), LP12, Meridian 508.24 (I heard this one. Well, not the most neutral around either, but nice..better than my Planet but than a modified DIO: not sure !) ?
Congrats: you probably also have a nicely colored, flawed system..!

Did not know BBC designed 104/2.
Your posts are sterile and quiet aggresive, each time somebody does not agree with you, you become close to the limit: See
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/speakers/messages/158754.html

So go back in your free of resonance concrete room, listening to your perfect system.....

oplancq

04-13-2004, 04:45 AM

Ah, ah, ah.....

First off, you are an idiot. I never listed what "MY" system is, it is in fact far superior to your pretender setup. It's nothing you have ever heard, could buy or have seen tested. My whole system (which I have not posted) has been reengineered from any stock form, so no, you have not heard any of it.

>>
Yes right. Why do you say on AA that you own MF A3.2, Meridian 508.24 ???? Let's say it's for a scond system...

Your main is the most hilarious system I ever heard...
Blablabla...Your system is from Mars made from unknown materials...Nuclear CDP ? I believe the radiation went to your brains and ears..

Second: you cannot hear 1st octave cleanly in a small room, bass wavelengths require space. So you made another false and asinine assumption.

>> That's what I thought...you have a room full of resonances and just do not get clean low bass

Fourth: you have no proof of a damn thing. There are not charts, reviews, postings, nothing whatsoever except your word. You have proof of NOTHING you claim.

>> Yes I have. But what about the references you mentioned in your fist post ?? nothing, nothing, nothing...

Sixth: This thread stopped going anywhere the moment you posted your unfounded lies. See fourth.

>> no, just facts. See 4.

Seventh: whether here or on AA if a retard like you (or anyone else) makes asinine, unproved, and retarded false claims with no proof at all blanketing and generalizing then expect to get flamed. You haven't seen "aggressive" yet, those threads have been deleted. But, I wasn't wrong in what I stated, just very pointed about it.

>> Looks like only you has the truth...Amen.

Eighth: You can stop any time. You and an entire army of morons and unreliable French reviewers can say anything you want. Doesn't change reality.

>> Really, stop surfing forums. You are useless to the community. And you are also racist ?

Ninth: I live a short drive from KEF...don't presume to tell me who designed them, or anything else.

>> Oh yeah. You don't even know some 104/2 were made in the 90's.

Tenth: Shove all of it up your A$$.

>> No comment

I forgive you: you are contaminated.

amitius

04-16-2004, 01:29 AM

it seems like this forum is a bit spiked up.

i hope you are as willing to help other 104/2 owners in need as well as arguing on who's ego is larger (0:

i recently bought the 104/2 with the ONKYO INTEGRA 939 and a SONY CDP-XE330.

I KNOW !!! i should buy better stuff... but i don't have the money, i will upgrade soon.

the problem with the KEF's i bought is a torched tweeter and the 8" drivers are crumbling on the inner edges.

i want to bring them to life, but... KEF doesn't make any of the driver units, so i have to repair the tweeter and the 8" drivers.
if i could, i would buy the whole drivers again.

If anybody has a thought about how i can give them old pair the treatment they deserve, i would greatly apreciate it.

truly yours
amit

"he who fights with dragons, in time would become a dragon himself" - Lord Byron

oplancq

04-16-2004, 06:20 AM

i want to bring them to life, but... KEF doesn't make any of the driver units, so i have to repair the tweeter and the 8" drivers.
if i could, i would buy the whole drivers again.

Hello,
I cannot help for the tweeter. Maybe on ebay ?? Wilmslow is selling Peerless 811528 as a replacement (https://secure.wilmslow-audio.co.uk/acatalog/Wilmslow_Audio_KEF_Drive_Units_8.html)...Probably the same size, but the Xover probably does not match anymore...Might be worth to try...
For the woofers, are you talking of the anti dust seal ? If yes, it's a known problem, KEF still has spare parts. You just need to glue the news ones. No need to replace the woofers. You should write a mail to KEF support. They are really helpfull.

Olivier

howyu@aol.com

04-25-2004, 06:38 PM

anybody know where I can get a set of tweeters for my KEF 104/2 speakers?
Thanks

loganarch

04-26-2004, 11:31 AM

I am a newcomer to this forum, but I have been reading this thread with interest. I am not going to coment on the attitudes of the writers, but will rather comment on an experiment that I carried out today on two pairs of 104/2 which I came to acquire recently. One is older than the other, and I was comparing their sound and found out that they indeed sound very different.

The older pair has serial number 5028 and the newer one is 16121, what these mean in terms of years of production, I can't tell. The sound difference is significant though. The newer one has faster bass, much more detail, clarity and immediacy (I know these are not technical audiophile terms, but my subjective impression.) On the other hand, it also is too bright and hard on badly recorded material, female voice, symbals and some horns. I prefer the newer pair in well recorded symphonic classical music as the detail they provide can be absolutely breathtaking, while I prefer the older ones for voice and jazz, only because the harshness that I hear on the high end of the newer ones gets tiring with this sort of music. I suspect that this is a result of their extreme accuracy betraying recording flows and all kinds of other problems upstream.

I can confirm that the difference is in the crossover. Both boxes are identical in construction and drivers have the same SP numbers. Swapping the mid/high modules does not affect the sound at all (ie. the older box sounds just the same as it did before when mounted with the newer driver module). So the variable must be the crossover. I feel that the newer crossover is so transparent that many of the faults in the recording and the rest of the system shows through, and I know that the rest of my system is far from being at par with these speakers.

Having liked the detail and dynamics in the newer pair, I am planning to keep that one and see if I can soften the high end by better matching cables and amplifiers. So any advice would be very much appreciated. My current system includes a NAD 2200 amp, Rotel 975 CD player, NAD 1155 pre and 12 ga multistrand generic cables. Trying a NAD 2600 / NAD 1000 (from my home system - this is my office system) did not make an audible effect in the sound, changing the CD player to a Burr/Brown 1706 DAC did reduce some of the harshness. A 1970's Onkyo A50 integrated amp took away all of the sybillants and harshness, but at the same time the punch of the bass fizzled out and the midrange lost detail. Using 16 ga. generic wire had the same effect (I know this is not audiophile talk, but I was just experimenting to see what changes affect their sound in what way.)

Any advice on what type of amp and speaker wires to use?

My second pair, or parts thereof, will be for sale soon. They have one pair of good and one pair of fried woofers, (good inner surrounds) slightly scratched cabinets, good midranges and tweeters (one tweeter slightly dimpled but sound not affected by that) and one pair of good grills with pegs missing. I still have not decided whether to sell them in parts or as a whole, but if anyone here needs parts, let me know and if there is enough demand to justify parting them out, I will.

Yosi

oplancq

04-27-2004, 04:37 AM

This is interesting...I was confirmed by KEF techs that there were a few different versions of
crossover used on the early 104/ 2 speakers. But the Xovers were fundamentally the same from a response, the difference being size and shape. Are your newer versions the biwire versions ? My 104/2 share the same behavior as your "new" ones: " The newer one has faster bass, much more detail, clarity and immediacy (I know these are not technical audiophile terms, but my subjective impression.) On the other hand, it also is too bright and hard on badly recorded material, female voice, symbals and some horns." Need to check what are the numbers. I don't know your system, but I believe KEFs like watts. I like my tube amp: VTL 75.

Olivier

loganarch

04-27-2004, 08:53 AM

No, both of mine are the single wire versions.

Well, power it is not what's lacking. The NAD 2200 is rated 200W/ch into 4ohms, 440/ch into 2. and a headroom that doubles that. the NAD 2600 is even more powerful. So that is not the issue. These are solid state amps known for their "budget audiophile" performance, powerful, accurate and neutral, but nothing esoteric and possibly too much switching noise. I just purchased a Bedini 250/250 Class A 250W/ch amp and some Audioquest GBC speaker wire. The Bedini is known for tube-like smooth sound, while preserving some of the solid state characteristics such as fast bass and detail. I will let you know what I find out when I listen to the new setup.

I looked at the crossovers to the extent that can be seen through the woofers' port and they appear to be the same layout with capacitors of the same physical dimensions in the same locations. I am wondering if the difference in sound is due to deterioration of the crossovers. Maybe the newer one is closer to the way it is supposed to sound.

What is yours' serial number?

Yosi

loganarch

04-27-2004, 10:15 AM

oplancq

04-28-2004, 11:22 AM

Olivier,

If you are talking to someone at KEF about this, it might be good to ask since both these speakers started their lives presumably with the same specificatioss for crossovers, which one represents deterioration, what kind of changes aging would cause in the crossovers.

Yosi

Mine are 17607a/b..You can contact KEF through email. They are usually quiet responsive.
I agree that your NAD should have quiet enough power...Let me know the results with the Bedini.
Do you think that the voices are slightly laid back ?

Olivier

loganarch

04-28-2004, 06:58 PM

Mine are 17607a/b..You can contact KEF through email. They are usually quiet responsive.
I agree that your NAD should have quiet enough power...Let me know the results with the Bedini.
Do you think that the voices are slightly laid back ?

Olivier

So yours are slightly newer than my newer ones. I should be getting the Bedini hooked up by the weekend. I will let you know.

I find the voices in general neutral, but there is sibillation with some records, but then again that may be from the amp or the source. As compared to my KEF C80, the voices are more forward, but laid back as compared to the Ohm Walsh 2, and to the KEF C60. But none of these speakers claim to be Reference quality, and their specs also show their coloration to be in the +/-3dB range vs. 104/2's claimed +/-2dB. If your room is too bare and reflective, the upper end may be slightly overwhelming the voices. For subtle changes in tonality I recommend playing with the speaker wires. They do make subtle differences that compensate for other parts of the system or the room, and experimenting with them it is possible to find one that compliments or compensates for some of the room and equipment characteristics. And many times the right cable is nothing esoteric but just a change in the gauge or the strand type. For example, my experience using silver coated multi strand (generic - $0.50/ft) wires with the C60 & C80's and the NAD amps in a low ceilinged reflective basement was that they de-emphasized the mid and bass and overemphasized the treble. On the other hand those same wires did very well with Celestion speakers, a low powered Pioneer and the soft finishes in the bedroom. I feel wires are like salt and spices, add to taste.

Something I noticed as I was doing A/B tests between the L and R channels was that one of the speakers had a different rendition on the cymbals, dryer and less detailed in the shimmering overtones that jazz cymbals often carry. I removed the tweeter and found out that it had been clamped down with such a force that the damping gasket around the tweeter had gotten too compressed and was partially deforming the surround of the tweeter (if you have not taken these apart, they are not mounted with four screws like other tweeters, but with a single central bolt pressing down from a wooden brace behind the tweeter.) The difference is not one that is readily visible, but a relative flattening of the appr. 1 mm profiled ring around the dome, thus limiting the movement of the tweeter. It must have been like this from original assembly, as there was no sign of the speaker being opened up before. I suspect someone at KEF was having a bad day and took it out on that tweeter, clamping it down with all his might. It is also possible but less likely that the enclosure of the mid/hi module shrank as a result of dry climate (Chicago is a lot dryer than England) and compressed things together. Well, after 15 years of deformation, it did not look like it was going to recover its shape, so I replaced the tweeter with one from the older pair, and now they sound quite the same, even though one is shinier than the other, visually. So much for having the tweeters matched... it all comes down to the guy who assembles it. It is also remarkable that the tweeters from production years that far apart can sound so much better together.

And that was my KEF adventure for the day.

Yosi

loganarch

04-29-2004, 07:18 AM

Mine are 17607a/b..You can contact KEF through email. They are usually quiet responsive.
I agree that your NAD should have quiet enough power...Let me know the results with the Bedini.
Do you think that the voices are slightly laid back ?

Olivier

Well, listening today to "Dark Side of the Moon", I think the voices are just right. I have been listening to this record for 32 years now, and there were always voice effects, whispers, mumblings, etc, that I could not understand because they were always too faint and unclear. Now I can hear them quite well with the 104/2. Not, only that, but now there is another layer of whispers and mumblings and breathings sounds, etc. that I never knew were there. If I only can get rid of the sibillation and graininess. I am convinced that hese are coming either from the amp or the source. Some wires might help filter them, at the expense of some of the other detail and immediacy. I hope the new amp will clear that, otherwise it means that they are asking for a very expensive CD Player.