Hi SY,
These are just thoughts.
I came across them while reading some info on a web site.
I was wondering if the sound was as good as people claimed?
Some people still seem to think they are hard to beat.
I am just looking at the spec for them, the drivers seem to be either hard to find or megga expensive.
Do you think that the modern designs make them obsolete?
Is it possible to build a modern version of this design?
Regards
M. Gregg
with regards to the last question, there are at least a couple of current homages to the namesake
Audiospace AS3/5A
Grant Fidelity LS3/5A
and probably others engineered/marketed as "good as or better than" , etc.,
keep in mind that IINM, there were rather a few variations on the official design, plus numerous wannabes over the course of 4 decades
I've very briefly heard both an official Rogers pair approx 25-30(?) yrs ago, and more recently one of the Chinese knock-offs possibly similar to the Grant Fidelity, but for different reasons neither exposure was memorable one way or the other.
Last edited:
a very fun looking and doubtless fine sounding project, but quite simply not in the same category as a low sensitivity 2-way mini-monitor
edit ; sorry Waki, I realize you were probably replying to
"obsolete" would perhaps not be the most diplomatic term, but no doubt many in a DIY forum would have suggestions as to what to build for far less money
Last edited:
Not sure what you're after. As pointed out there are sites devoted to this speaker..............and one that just takes it apart quite critically, the guy slams it!
Only recently here (Australia) a rebuilt secondhand one sold for around $800 (US) on eBay.
One of the limiting factors was the size requirement. The BBC demanded that it had to be small. If I ever got a pair I think I might experiment with a larger box. Secondly I would play around with the mounting of the woofer. It fix from behind the baffle. I don't know why. The only suggestion I have is that the B110 basket does not have very wide openings. When measured they are around 50% of the cone area. So any further obstruction may have effected the "colouration". But a thin steel baffle could provide the best of both worlds and allow from mounting and no rear restrictions. Then you could look at the T27 cross over. The KEF 104ab network is on the web and that might be worth a look.
Anyway, what prompted your initial post? Seen a pair s/hand?
EDIT. DOH! Sorry, just went back and read your other post. There is a good site that will take you through a diy cloning operation with diagrams of the box etc.. I have just acquired a pair of KEF Concertos and with an earlier pair of B110 I have I will be looking at a clone or copy.
Only recently here (Australia) a rebuilt secondhand one sold for around $800 (US) on eBay.
One of the limiting factors was the size requirement. The BBC demanded that it had to be small. If I ever got a pair I think I might experiment with a larger box. Secondly I would play around with the mounting of the woofer. It fix from behind the baffle. I don't know why. The only suggestion I have is that the B110 basket does not have very wide openings. When measured they are around 50% of the cone area. So any further obstruction may have effected the "colouration". But a thin steel baffle could provide the best of both worlds and allow from mounting and no rear restrictions. Then you could look at the T27 cross over. The KEF 104ab network is on the web and that might be worth a look.
Anyway, what prompted your initial post? Seen a pair s/hand?
EDIT. DOH! Sorry, just went back and read your other post. There is a good site that will take you through a diy cloning operation with diagrams of the box etc.. I have just acquired a pair of KEF Concertos and with an earlier pair of B110 I have I will be looking at a clone or copy.
Last edited:
I owned original Rogers and later, Chartwell. They are a mix of strengths and weaknesses. Superb rendition of space and midrange/treble tonality, good impression of detail. They do not play loud. No deep bass, and the rather highish Q of the LF cutoff makes them a challenge to subwoof effectively. Not terribly efficient and poor power handling. Impedance curve is all over the place, which means care must be used in selecting a power amp. Mine were usually run from some 40 watt triode amps I had at the time.
Morgan Jones uses his to listen to Pink Floyd and Beethoven symphonies. Those would not be my first choices of music for these speakers! When I got my first pair, I was deep into small combo jazz and acoustic bluegrass (I guess I still am!), and they did a great job in those genres. They're brilliant on string quartets, and I was blown away by how well they reproduced the Chicago Symphony Winds (Sheffield Lab 22).
Morgan Jones uses his to listen to Pink Floyd and Beethoven symphonies. Those would not be my first choices of music for these speakers! When I got my first pair, I was deep into small combo jazz and acoustic bluegrass (I guess I still am!), and they did a great job in those genres. They're brilliant on string quartets, and I was blown away by how well they reproduced the Chicago Symphony Winds (Sheffield Lab 22).
Sorry, that was a bit terse. The reply was prompted by Morgan Jones' comment that the Arpeggios have supplanted his own LS3/5As. He is admittedly the designer of the Arpeggios, but he was also a BBC engineer, listens to them in preference, and employs them in similar circumstances to those in which he used the LS3s. I don't think the improved sensitivity would be considered as a disadvantage.
w
w
I worked with a pair for years, and then inherited a pair of their evolutionary offspring, the JR149. I reworked the JR149 with a scan 9300, far superior tweeter to the original. They were much better sounding when I was done but they're still very modest.
This is a classic example of a good speaker for the time but its been far bettered in even small modern speakers. The B110 woofer is really not a good driver. Its dispersion is very uneven and it has a bad response right through the critical midrange. If it was offered new today, it would not be well regarded.
Don't get me wrong, if you like classic speakers, its a good one. But its like comparing the performance of a 35 year old car with a new one, you can't compare them on performance, or value, only nostalgia and an appreciation of their historical place.
This is a classic example of a good speaker for the time but its been far bettered in even small modern speakers. The B110 woofer is really not a good driver. Its dispersion is very uneven and it has a bad response right through the critical midrange. If it was offered new today, it would not be well regarded.
Don't get me wrong, if you like classic speakers, its a good one. But its like comparing the performance of a 35 year old car with a new one, you can't compare them on performance, or value, only nostalgia and an appreciation of their historical place.
Hi,
It depends what you are looking for, but no, they are not as good as people
say they are and complete speakers or suitable parts are way overpriced.
Possibly the pinnacle of small speaker design :
Zaph|Audio - ZD5 - Scan Speak 15W8530K00 and Vifa XT25
On my advice my brother instead bought some original alnico Spendor SA1's.
These are in all respects a lot better and cheaper than the LS3/5A's IMHO.
rgds, sreten.
See : BBC LS3/5a loudspeaker | Stereophile.com for loads of info
It depends what you are looking for, but no, they are not as good as people
say they are and complete speakers or suitable parts are way overpriced.
Possibly the pinnacle of small speaker design :
Zaph|Audio - ZD5 - Scan Speak 15W8530K00 and Vifa XT25
On my advice my brother instead bought some original alnico Spendor SA1's.
These are in all respects a lot better and cheaper than the LS3/5A's IMHO.
rgds, sreten.
See : BBC LS3/5a loudspeaker | Stereophile.com for loads of info
My late Father, talked about the LS5's, and claimed to be involved with the project whilst working at Goodmans, in Portsmouth in the 70's. My father 'acquired' some of the woofers although which type i have no idea, and built his own bookshelf monitors in a bigger box, approx twice as deep. made his own tweeter dome from a ally pie dish....my dad was a toolmaker prior to working for Goodmans, so he probably turned his own polepiece as well. I grew up listening to these and the LS5's my mother eventually bought, and I prefer his. The LS5's are iconic for good reason. great imaging, mids and highs. sometimes a little congested when you push the 15 Ohms ones, but the tweeter sizzle i dont find THAT apparent. maybe im deaf though 
Ive yet to build a speaker which I think is superior in regard to imaging, maybe im crap at building speakers though
BUT, i hate the highish Q bass roll off. the driver in a slightly larger box may sound lighter but far better. I just find some kick drums sound HUGE and others sound like all the life has been sucked out of them. I also hate the way a 30 watt amp runs out of steam awful quick with these things and to be honest id never trust them on a bigger amp. Oh and the extremely complex crossover is another thing i hate. The flat response probably contributes to the spacial quality, but the level of filtering needed to tame the drivers....Id still be tempted to revamp my mums LS5's with new components though....
Ive yet to build a speaker which I think is superior in regard to imaging, maybe im crap at building speakers though BUT, i hate the highish Q bass roll off. the driver in a slightly larger box may sound lighter but far better. I just find some kick drums sound HUGE and others sound like all the life has been sucked out of them. I also hate the way a 30 watt amp runs out of steam awful quick with these things and to be honest id never trust them on a bigger amp. Oh and the extremely complex crossover is another thing i hate. The flat response probably contributes to the spacial quality, but the level of filtering needed to tame the drivers....Id still be tempted to revamp my mums LS5's with new components though....
Hello,
FWIW, this gentleman who worked at Speakerlab in Seattle in the 70's chronicles his "American High Fidelity" knock off of the LS3 5/a
Cheers
Terry
A book entitled "Thoughts to my Boys, Alex Orme and Mike Orme": June 2009
FWIW, this gentleman who worked at Speakerlab in Seattle in the 70's chronicles his "American High Fidelity" knock off of the LS3 5/a
Cheers
Terry
A book entitled "Thoughts to my Boys, Alex Orme and Mike Orme": June 2009
Here is the original research paper entitled "The design of the miniature monitoring loudspeaker type LS3/5A" by H.D. Harwood, B.Sc., M.E. Whatton, C.Eng., M.I.E.E. and R.W. MiIIs.
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf
It is too big (389kb) to attach to this post.
I read somewhere that they are so expensive to build is because of the sophisticated (over-complicated perhaps) crossover.
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf
It is too big (389kb) to attach to this post.
I read somewhere that they are so expensive to build is because of the sophisticated (over-complicated perhaps) crossover.
Hi,
Its fundamental to the correct tonal balance of the speaker,
don't want to go into the details in this thread, but it is a
correct design decision in the overall scheme of things,
(given apparent tonal balance overrides transient quality.)
gds, sreten.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.