Short answer: the KEF Blade Two Meta for better sound quality, the Polk Audio Reserve R700 for the lower price. The KEF Blade Two Meta ranks #3 of 226 floorstanding speakers, rated 4.8/5, at $28,000. The Polk Audio Reserve R700 ranks #65, rated 4.3/5, at $2,398, $25,602 cheaper.
What the Polk Audio Reserve R700 does well: Three-way design with a 1” ring radiator tweeter, 6.5” mid-range, and dual 8” mid-bass drivers in a ported, down-firing cabinet. The catch: Compression in the high frequencies rises sharply between 96dB and 102dB output: a real limitation only at very high volumes (around 100dB at 3 meters), but a clear step down from pricier ($5,000+) towers.
The KEF Blade Two Meta is the more accurate, deeper-bass option. True point-source coaxial design (four 6.5in mid-bass drivers flanking a coincident mid/tweeter) with matched ~50 degree horizontal and vertical dispersion, unusual for a multi-driver speaker. Its measured preference score, a predictor of how neutral it sounds, is 6.99 against 6.38 for the Polk Audio Reserve R700. Its bass reaches about 31Hz before falling 3dB, against 40Hz for the Polk Audio Reserve R700. The catch: 2dB dip and slight resonance around 200Hz, also visible in KEF white paper and likely cabinet-related.
Buy the Polk Audio Reserve R700 if the price is the priority over sound quality, or the KEF Blade Two Meta if sound quality is the priority over the price.
Want more options? Browse the full Passive Home rankings.
Specifications Side By Side
| Polk Audio Reserve R700 | KEF Blade Two Meta | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $2,398 per pair | $28,000 per pair only sold in stores |
| Ranked | #65 of 226 in Large Size Floorstanding Speakers | #3 of 226 in Large Size Floorstanding Speakers |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 31Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 26Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 40Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 31Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Impedance | 4 ohms nominal, 3.5 ohms minimum (measured above 80Hz, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 4 ohms nominal (3.3 ohms minimum, measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 87.5dB (measured average 300Hz-3kHz @ 2.83V/1m, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 86.8dB (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Drivers | 2x 8” polypropylene cone woofers, 1x 6.5” turbine cone midrange, 1x 1” Pinnacle ring radiator tweeter | 4 x 165 mm (6.5 in.) aluminium cone, force cancelling woofers, 125 mm (5 in.) aluminium cone midrange, 25 mm (1 in.) aluminium dome with MAT tweeter |
| Weight | 102.1 lbs (46.3 kg) | 79.4 lbs (36 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, down-firing | ported, rear |
| Dimensions | 45”H x 12.6”W x 16.9”D (1143.8 x 320.7 x 428.3 mm) | 46.6”H x 13.5”W x 14.8”D (1183.6 x 342.9 x 375.9 mm) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.38 | 6.99 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.83 | 8.11 |
| DIY Kit | No | No |
Related Speaker Comparisons
How KEF Blade Two Meta compares with other leading options:
- GR-Research NX-Treme vs KEF Blade Two Meta
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs MoFi SourcePoint V10 Master Edition
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs MoFi SourcePoint 888
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs Revel F328Be
- Radiant Acoustics Clarity 66 vs KEF Blade Two Meta
Prices on this page were last checked October 9, 2026 at 8:01 AM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
The Two Speakers In Full
Polk Audio Reserve R700: $2,398 per pair Amazon eBay
Same family: the Polk Reserve R100 (smaller bookshelf, rated 3.4/5), the Polk R200 (larger bookshelf, rated 3.2/5), the Polk Reserve R500 (smaller floorstanding, ranked lower, rated 4.2/5), the Polk Reserve R600 (smaller floorstanding, ranked lower, estimated 4.2/5), the Polk Audio Reserve R300 (smallest center, estimated 3.6/5), the Polk Audio Reserve R350 (center, rated 3.7/5) and the Polk Audio Reserve R400 (largest center, estimated 3.8/5).
Pros: Three-way design with a 1” ring radiator tweeter, 6.5” mid-range, and dual 8” mid-bass drivers in a ported, down-firing cabinet. On-axis frequency response holds within about ±2dB across most of its range, with genuinely deep bass extension (F3 40Hz) reaching into the mid-30s Hz in-room. Wide horizontal radiation of about ±70°, giving a strong, enveloping stereo width and stage-extension effect on well-recorded tracks. Good low-level dynamics: solid bass thump at quiet listening volumes without over-accentuation. Strong distortion and compression control through the bass and midrange. Real nominal impedance closer to 4 ohms than the marketed 8 ohms, so with the right amplifier it can be driven hard: a $3,000 two-channel integrated brought out significantly more life than a budget $300 unit could. Excellent value at its roughly $1199/pair, ranking among the reviewer’s top picks under $2,500; outperforms the similarly-priced Klipsch RP-8000F II in bass extension and overall smoothness. Measured bass extension of 40Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 87.5dB.
Cons: Compression in the high frequencies rises sharply between 96dB and 102dB output: a real limitation only at very high volumes (around 100dB at 3 meters), but a clear step down from pricier ($5,000+) towers. Horizontal directivity mismatch around 4-5kHz, where the tweeter flares wider than the midrange, can sound a bit forward, especially noticeable when toed out further into the room; sidewall absorption or curtains help tame it. Harmonic distortion crosses the reviewer’s 3% threshold around 7kHz at 96dB output, possibly contributing to that same forward quality at high volume. Narrow vertical sweet spot (about ±15° from the tweeter axis), typical of non-coaxial tower designs: more of a consideration for multi-row home theater seating than single-row listening. The ring-radiator tweeter narrows noticeably above about 7-8kHz, and toeing the speaker out more than about 20° causes the top end to fall off quickly. Needs at least 2 feet of clearance from the rear wall to avoid boomy, exaggerated bass, since it lacks the bass-shelf tuning some rivals use to allow closer wall placement. Compared to the pricier KEF R5 Meta, has narrower horizontal (and much narrower vertical) directivity, so seating flexibility is more limited.
Full Polk Audio Reserve R700 review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 31Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 40Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 45”H x 12.6”W x 16.9”D (1143.8 x 320.7 x 428.3 mm) |
| Drivers | 2x 8” polypropylene cone woofers, 1x 6.5” turbine cone midrange, 1x 1” Pinnacle ring radiator tweeter |
| Impedance | 4 ohms nominal, 3.5 ohms minimum (measured above 80Hz, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 87.5dB (measured average 300Hz-3kHz @ 2.83V/1m, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.38 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 7.83 |
| Weight | 102.1 lbs (46.3 kg) |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, down-firing |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs PSB Imagine T65
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs JBL HDI-3600
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs JBL Studio 698
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs Emotiva Airmotiv T2+
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs ELAC Debut 3.0 DF63
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs KEF R11 Meta
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs Polk Reserve R500
- Polk Audio Reserve R700 vs Ascend Acoustics Sierra Titan Tower
- See all 44 comparisons
KEF Blade Two Meta: $28,000 per pair only sold in stores eBay
Same family: the KEF Blade One Meta (larger floorstanding, ranked higher, estimated 4.8/5).
Pros: True point-source coaxial design (four 6.5in mid-bass drivers flanking a coincident mid/tweeter) with matched ~50 degree horizontal and vertical dispersion, unusual for a multi-driver speaker. Fully rounded, edgeless cabinet eliminates baffle diffraction. Frequency response holds within about 2.5dB across the listening window. Extremely low harmonic and multitone distortion even at 96dB, with under 0.5dB of compression at full output, rivaling the KEF Reference 1 Meta and JBL 4367 in dynamic range. Reviewer described the imaging and soundstage depth as revealing recording details other speakers he tested (PS Audio Aspen FR10, MoFi SourcePoint 8, Neumann KH80) masked. Available in any custom finish at no extra charge. Measured bass extension of 31Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 86.8dB.
Cons: 2dB dip and slight resonance around 200Hz, also visible in KEF white paper and likely cabinet-related. Bass rolls off fairly quickly below its 31Hz F3. Horizontal dispersion (~50 degrees) is narrower than the reviewer preferred 70-80 degrees; benefits from toeing out 10-20 degrees to open soundstage without losing image focus. Needs a separate power amp, not AVR-friendly.
Full KEF Blade Two Meta review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 26Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 31Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 46.6”H x 13.5”W x 14.8”D (1183.6 x 342.9 x 375.9 mm) |
| Drivers | 4 x 165 mm (6.5 in.) aluminium cone, force cancelling woofers, 125 mm (5 in.) aluminium cone midrange, 25 mm (1 in.) aluminium dome with MAT tweeter |
| Impedance | 4 ohms nominal (3.3 ohms minimum, measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 86.8dB (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 6.99 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 8.11 |
| Weight | 79.4 lbs (36 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs GR-Research NX-Treme
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs MoFi SourcePoint V10 Master Edition
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs MoFi SourcePoint 888
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs Revel F328Be
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs Radiant Acoustics Clarity 66
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs Ascend Acoustics ELX Ribbon Tower
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs Magico S5 2024
- KEF Blade Two Meta vs KEF R5 Meta
- See all 36 comparisons