All you need for these babies is a room of at least 20 m2 and and amp 2x35W or higher. I don't agree with someone who said they sound bright. With the right amp (Rotel) the don't, they make music very well! One of the best speakers at the price given the size. ALso tried B&W dm603, TDL RTL3SE, B&W P4, Monitor Audio 4. I agree that the dynaudio audience 50 sounds better, yeah, in a 3x3 room , but not in bigger, and they need a whole lot of power.
Kefs are great for jazz & instrumental couse of very natural mids and highs, but they can player rock & pop as well couse of their power handeling, and
very good bass extension (Q15 can't do that!)

System:

Rotel RB-970 power amp
NAD 116 Pre amp
Marantz cd-48 cd player + Musical Fidelity X-ACT DAC
Cable talk 3.1 & Kimber pbj cables!

I am a novice listener but spent weeks researching and listening to speakers that would best suit my needs. After reading such good things about the Q-55's I was very disappointed when I found that the woofer was torn right from the factory. It is obvious that there is something lacking in their quality control. Fortunately, the dealer exchanged them right away. However, I now wonder about what else is wrong that I might not have noticed or never will.The speakers do sound pretty good, but a company making that much money should ensure their workmanship!

I just listened to these for the second time. I think the sound is incredible. I first listened to some sarah mcloclin(not spelled right as im not a fan, its just my only cd with instruments on it) and then i listened to some tribe called quest, and as soon as the snare hit i was sold. Im gonna order them in a couple weeks, ill update you once i get them and tell you what i really think about them. But as for now im very impressed.
oh yeah and for all you people readin these reviews and you notice that the Q35's sound like theyre different than the Q55's, theyre not, the only difference is there is no woofer on the Q35's, but they use the same uni-q driver. Which by the way is the same mid and high KEF uses in all their speakers all the way up to the top reference. Pretty nice huh?

I think the KEF Q55s are a great pair of speakers. I bought them in October '98 when I only had a crappy 10 yr old 55wpc Denon receiver to power them. Two months ago I replaced that with a 125wpc ADCOM GFA-5400 amplifier, which I paid good money for. With both amps the KEFs had a smooth sound, prominent midrange, outstanding imaging, and remarkable resolution for a speaker at this price ($800 list). In fact this was the #1 reason why I was so attracted to it in the first place. I read the reviews, visited the website, but only until I heard it was I sure to buy it.
In the showroom these speakers were fine but when I finally got them home I found out that I could make them sound even better. After a period of burn-in and hours of playing and finally a system/ cable/ wire demagnetization (which isn't necessary if I HAD purchased better shielded cables and interconnects) I was ready for some serious evaluation. For me speaker placement was the big issue here in order to ensure good sound, especially in the bass. Because this isn't a huge speaker I never expected it to shake the floor. To be honest it can't. It only goes down to 40Hz but I can live with that. (I should note that when auditioning this pair of speakers I also listened to the Q35s which is essentially the same except in regard to the bass. The Q55s obviously have more extension and they aren't much more costly. Buying the Q65s wouldn't make sense either cuz it only goes 2Hz lower and doesn't really get any louder plus its $400 more. I was told that these speakers would be my best bet cuz unless I was spending $2000 or more on speakers I wouldn't be able to appreciate the difference so I should just save my money. And so I consider these to be great speakers for audiophiles on a budget. If you call $800 a budget.) I was very impressed with the definition, speed, and clarity these speakers were able to deliver. The bass blends seamlessly with the midrange and the treble is clean and precise. Combine that with superb imaging and you got concert hall presence. Incidently, I found out that by moving the speakers outward toward the walls that tended to widen the soundstage but it also weakened the image. Toe-in is also very important as you can sharpen the image by facing the drivers more toward the "sweet spot". The soundstage may sound two-dimensional if this isn't done correctly. Clearly, you have to find a balance.

I am still in the process of upgrading my system and since the beginning I've always had my "trusty" Sony CDP-535 cd changer as my source. It has this 5 mode DSP circuitry, which I found out years later as I got more attuned to audio is just a gimmick. I doesn't add any more musicality than a good DAC or digital filter would to create more "analog" sound. The parameters in those modes are probably wrong or something cuz they sound horrible and I realize that this has no place in a hi-end system like mine. I would like to purchase a good pre-amp as well as upgrade my CD player preferably to a HDCD one with good build quality. You may be wondering how I could play music with only a CD changer, amp, and speakers. The CD changer I own fortunately has a line out volume control. But it has no digital outs. It turns out that when I want to purchase a new player I would have to get a pre-amp as well cuz I don't know of many HDCD single-players with volume controls. I'd be spending more in one purchase than I normally would since I usually upgrade only one component at a time. This time I don't have a choice.

The reason I mention all of this is, the KEFs great sounding as they sound now, I'm sure will sound absolutely fantastic when I hook them up to better hi-end electronics. I give them 5 stars cuz I bought them more than $150 less than list. Also for a future rating - 5 stars (which won't change) - when I finally get that CD player and pre-amp. Then everything will be perfect.

I've researched speakers for close to 5 years before I bought my Q 55's. I watched the Q line actually evolve into the line it is today. I originally was aiming for the Reference series (Model 1 or Model 2), but the prices were just a little beyond my means. When I decided to go with the Q series I was targeting the Q 65 model. I sat in a listening room and compared the Q 55 and Q 65 models to Paradigm, Boston Acoustics ( 3 models), Energy and Aerial Acoustics. I used 2 CD's, The Eagles Live and 3 tenors. There was NO COMPARISON!!! The Q series blew away every speaker that was compared to them. The highs right down to the bass was so tight and crisp. I listened to them with my girlfriend ( at the time ) who listens to all her music on a "boom box" and she was floored by the sound! Hotel California never sounded like that! The 3 tenors CD was the iceing. The vocal tones were so colorfull and so "live" I could almost see them singing. I chose the Q 55's because the Q 65's didn't really sound that much different. The bass on the 65's shook the clock on the wall a little more than the 55's but it wasn't audible to the human ear. The 75's were a little bit more fuller but for the price difference it couldn't be justified ( to me anyway). I have Atlantic Technology for my center and rears but plan on replacing them with the Kef 200c for the center and the Kef TDM 34's for the rear. Unless you spend 4 grand on a pair of Martin Logan speakers, you are not going to find a better sounding speaker on the market!!!

Like I said before, there's some time now I own these speakers.I understand why some people feel it's bright. They have lot's of detail to offer in HF, but with a bright amp, the sound isn't that good (yamaha ax-492/592). I bought NAD 312 amp, and there is no bright treble any more. Just bunch of detail, very good bass. And oh yes, positioning ... I think that they should be kept around 50 - 70 cm from the rear wall, not more, or the bass will go into boom. Anyway, when at around 90 - 100 cm from the rear wall, there is more definition in the mids, and better imaging.

Cambridge Audio CD4SE is something I'll probably buy soon, or maybe marantz cd-48.

(as you can see, I don't have the kind of money for CD and AMP that I need)
(Audio Analogue Puccini SE and Cambridge CD6 would be more like it)


Feel free to drop me an e-mail.

clarity , construction , technology ,power.

needs more bass

this is a great speaker , if you want home theater at its best this is it , for music amazing lots of clarity , i tried klipsch rf3 but kef q55 just blows them away ,i use a klipsch ksw 12 subwofer and its a perfect match.

Similar Products Used:

infinity sm122 klipsch rf3

All the capability of making credible all type of music.

Err, to this price, none.

They just sound great. Very realistic, controlled bass, smooth vocals from jazz to opera. From the acoustic music of Kodo, to electronic of Vangelis or Tomita, from The Police, to Stravinsky´s Firebird (really dificult for many speakers).

To obtain all the best, i recommed biwiring them, and use the spikes!!!

When i was about to buy them, i listened a lot of speakers, and in a session were the ampli was a Rotel 971, i compared them directly to the B&W 604, Mission 753, and there was no chance, the KEF were the ones to beat. Only the Kef Reference Series2 sounded better, but at a price that... Maybe some day.

Similar Products Used:

Mission, Castle, Tannoy, B&W, JBL.

Clear highs, realistic mids, smooth deep bass and an excellent integration of the three.

Naff grills

After one of my neighbours kindly lifted my new system while I was away, the insurance payout gave me the opportunity to audition all the components again (not all bad). Here are my thoughts after spending two hours in a demo room switching between four speakers:

By far the best of the bunch were the Q55.2s showing a punchy sound that was detailed and controlled. Highs were crystal clear without being harsh, mids were realistic and the bass was smooth.

The next best were the R2s with their smooth and detailed sound. Not as bright as the KEFs and maybe a touch laid back but a real pleasure to listen to.

The Q35.2s had a bright sound with a large sound stage. Very clear but their forwardness began to hurt my ears after a short while.

The R3s were disappointing to say the least, with muffled mids and muddy bass. Nothing much to say about them at all.

The Q55.2s are fine speakers and I had no hesitation in buying them.

Similar Products Used:

Tannoy R2, R3 and KEF Q35.2
Tested with Cyrus 7 amp and Cyrus Dad1.5 CD

Clarity, soundstage, highs and mids are AWESOME!

Can be lacking in low bass, nit-picky

This a follow up to my previous review. The more I listen to these speakers, the more impressed I am with their sound. I went to a local stereo store today to listen to some other speakers just because. I got in my head that there is something better out there and I was missing something. I brought some of my favorite CDs, Earl Klugh, Lee Retinour, Dave Grusin and an old favorite rock CD, Humble Pie's greatest hits. Nothing I listened to in the Q-55s price range came close to their sound, I.M.O. The only speakers that blew me away were JBLs new Studio Series. The S-38s are going to replace my Q-15s and BIC sub in my bedroom. I was also impressed with the JBL S-310s and S-312s. They remind me of the JBL of old with a more refined and sophisticated quality. They still don't measure up to the Q-55s delicacy and imaging, but they are impressive with their clarity. I guess I learned the old lesson that the grass is'nt always greener ect.! I will hang ont my Q-55s!

Similar Products Used:

Kef Q-15s