Meadowlark Kestrel and Herons

B

Bourney

Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
106
Reaction score
0
Im looking at Meadowlark speakers at the mo (never ending speaker search!), i have only ever owned and heard the swifts briefly, which were a bit upfront for me (in my old very bass light room). I've now moved to a bigger more forgiving room and would like to try some of the larger models.

the original Herons are available within my budget but i am concerned about their size having never seen them in real life, i sit across the width of a 30ft x 13ft room so would be around 11 ft away. i also only use 30 watts of valve power so would i be stretching it a bit with the Herons?

i am thinking the Kestrel maybe better suited and have been kindly offered a dem by a fellow ZG'er but would value anyone's experience of these speakers very much so i dont waste anyones time.

Thanks

Steve
 
I've talked to Steve at length before about them. I really like them, but I like my horns too. Funny I was going to start a thread about fixing the ding on the ML's.

What are they like? They're a bit like the classic BBC Harbeths. The bass can be very impresive, but like all speakers with smallish drivers the bass is a little false. I'm a classical music fan so I miss how a gentle tap on the bass drum can make the air move. The Klipsch's do that much better. The Klipsch are less tonally accurate.

I've heard the ML's sound very nice with big powerful amps, but they're also fine with 11 watts of Triode .

Good speakers, and for what they fetch, a bargain.
 
Steve,

As I am sure you know I have some Herons and Blue Heron 2's that are in a smaller room than yours (19x13 ft). I heard Tony's BH2's in his old house in Cheltenham which had an even smaller room than mine and they certainly worked well.

In the Heron manual, it says they are designed to work with valves, but I have only every tried ss.

They are physically quite a big speaker, which may be an issue. Anyway, you are welcome to have a listen and you can bring your own amp down if that helps.
 
and I am using Hotrod shearwaters in a room measuring 3.4 x 3.2 metres (if memory serves), and they work fine. Bass was originally a little boomy, but worked beautifully in the previous house (with the room very slightly smaller) and was "fixed" when the room was recarpeted and furnished properly.
 
I had Kestrel Hotrods and now have Kestrel 2s.

What Lordsummit says is pretty true, but with the proviso that although the bass does suffer limitations of small drivers, they're much less so than other speakers I have heard with similar size drivers. Certainly they've put me off ported speakers, being much tighter and yet deeper.

They need to be set up carefully in the room. My current room has too bouncy a floor to allow them to work at their best, and the older models with rear transmission line ends need room behind them - the newer ones with the front end are less bothered by this, but still don't want to be too close to walls.

To echo Lordsummit again, if you want to have a listen to the K2s, running off relatively modest power (bridged monarchy SM70s - about 70W class a SS) you are welcome - I live about 15 miles from lordsummit if you're in the area.
 
Hi Bourney, Sorry didnt reply to your PM.

My thoughts are that you may get a better sound from the larger ML's.
I use my Kestrel HR's in a room that is about 3m x 3.5m and i find i am wanting more bass.

Isaac, what do you think of the K2's compared to the hot rods?
 
Horses for courses and all that.
Mostly I am happy with them and to be honest I will probably be trying room treatment before speaker change. Also a suspended floor thats 70 years old, it doesn't help.
 
i have been using some front ported JM lab stand mounters (electra 906's) and havent felt they have been lacking bottom end so i expected the Kestrels to have at least similar if not more bass? i have some Heybrook Sextets on loan at home at the moment, they arent huge speakers but they give me the sort of bottom end weight i am after. they are superb speakers actually.

if they sound like the Swifts they wont be my thing at all. has anyone heard the swifts and older Kestrels and can describe the differences? the kestrels are bigger sounding speakers than the swifts aren't they?
 
I would think so. They have plenty of bass. But I think you'll find the top and mid better than on the Heybrooks. They're not upfront at all. Much less so than any JM Labs I've ever heard. Their tweeter always seems a bit forward to me.
 
The K2s don't have the slight mid-range recession that the KHRs did (in my current room anyway). The bass is not quite as forceful on a leading edge (but then again, I'm using less powerful, higher output impedance amplifiers now), but overall somewhat better balanced.
 
lordsummit said:
I would think so. They have plenty of bass. But I think you'll find the top and mid better than on the Heybrooks. They're not upfront at all. Much less so than any JM Labs I've ever heard. Their tweeter always seems a bit forward to me.
Click to expand...

the top and mid on the Heybrooks is amazing, the ribbon tweeter is very sweet when they are positioned correctly. if my amp controlled them more tightly as the volume went up these would be my ideal speaker.

my jm labs arent bright at all, the swifts were far more raucous at the top end than the JM labs. i found the swifts very upfront which makes me think soemthing may not have been right with them. they were nearly new dem models.

if the Kestrels can match the Heybrooks in those areas mentioned above i would be Very pleased indeedy :)

its amazing the differences in opinion we find with the same kit, one persons experiences can be totally the opposite of anothers, just shows that room & electronics interraction play a massive part.
 
hi Tony hope you are well.

Tim had my swifts on your recommendation and he says they are sounding great so maybe they just werent run in like you say.

looking forward to trying the hot rodded kestrels :)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top