When BBC studios were closing down in london ready for the move to salford there was an auction of stuff and ratty old unmatched pairs were going for £600 then appearing on ebay for £1000 with 'ex BBC' apparantly making them worth more.
And yet the original prototypes are considered way better than any production units and no one has ever tried to replicate those!
And yet the original prototypes are considered way better than any production units and no one has ever tried to replicate those!
Actually they have. To a point anyway; when Sterling Broadcast were selling cabinets to DIYers, their priciest offering was based on those prototypes. 'not sure if they're still doing that or if they've gone entirely commercial.
Personally, I suspect (though I have no evidence to support this, so YMMV) that these early prototypes, with their screwed on rear baffles, may have had greater box leakage, which will have acted like what is often (inaccurately) termed an aperiodic box, bleeding off a small amount of pressure under dynamic load conditions & fractionally lowering the Q. One possible cause, along with very careful part selection. Pure speculation of course, and almost certainly we're also dealing with the weight of audio mythology that grew once the hi-fi brigade became involved. Even then, there isn't a consensus. Alan Shaw, IIRC, regards well-built versions of the later 11ohm models as superior to the early 15ohm LS3/5a versions, including the prototypes.
Re comparisons between mini-monitors -well, could be entertaining providing that's all that it is taken as being. Unless the speakers being compared were designed for the same purpose (and the aforementioned examples were not), then basic scientific methodology dictates all you can really draw from such a comparison is that
a/ under a given set of condititions (which some or none may have been optimised for) x number of people prefer a particular speaker. And
b/ Different speakers, designed differently, with different enclosures, on + off-axis frequency, impedance, distortion performance, sound different.
The truth is, very few if any of the speakers that claim some connection to the LS3/5a necessarily have much in common with it. The LS50 certainly doesn't, other than being a compact loudspeaker with drivers built by KEF. Plenty of designs inspired by it, some of which are superior in some respects (possibly even all), but as far as I know, none were designed to precisely the same criteria, which itself changed slightly over time as BBC technical requirements subtly altered.
Personally, I suspect (though I have no evidence to support this, so YMMV) that these early prototypes, with their screwed on rear baffles, may have had greater box leakage, which will have acted like what is often (inaccurately) termed an aperiodic box, bleeding off a small amount of pressure under dynamic load conditions & fractionally lowering the Q. One possible cause, along with very careful part selection. Pure speculation of course, and almost certainly we're also dealing with the weight of audio mythology that grew once the hi-fi brigade became involved. Even then, there isn't a consensus. Alan Shaw, IIRC, regards well-built versions of the later 11ohm models as superior to the early 15ohm LS3/5a versions, including the prototypes.
Re comparisons between mini-monitors -well, could be entertaining providing that's all that it is taken as being. Unless the speakers being compared were designed for the same purpose (and the aforementioned examples were not), then basic scientific methodology dictates all you can really draw from such a comparison is that
a/ under a given set of condititions (which some or none may have been optimised for) x number of people prefer a particular speaker. And
b/ Different speakers, designed differently, with different enclosures, on + off-axis frequency, impedance, distortion performance, sound different.
The truth is, very few if any of the speakers that claim some connection to the LS3/5a necessarily have much in common with it. The LS50 certainly doesn't, other than being a compact loudspeaker with drivers built by KEF. Plenty of designs inspired by it, some of which are superior in some respects (possibly even all), but as far as I know, none were designed to precisely the same criteria, which itself changed slightly over time as BBC technical requirements subtly altered.
Last edited:
Ok I was doubly wrong. Falcon did a limited edition last years of 50 pairs to original BBC specs (first pairs were modified LS3/5 cabinets apparantly). Blog No. 14: An LS3/5a For the Ages Nearly £7k a pair!
I found the 'shootout' I mentioned as well LS3/5A HiFi News Shootout which is both interesting and perturbing as to the levels audiophiles will go to. I am not sure I could stay sane listening to 11 almost identical pairs of speakers and putting them in order.
I found the 'shootout' I mentioned as well LS3/5A HiFi News Shootout which is both interesting and perturbing as to the levels audiophiles will go to. I am not sure I could stay sane listening to 11 almost identical pairs of speakers and putting them in order.
By the '80s the Ls3/5as were falling behind in reviews compared to other contemporary speakers. They were seen as a tired design.
Other than the mysticism and religion surrounding them in certain parts of the world, perhaps sound-wise they have a certain colouration that is appealing?
Compare them to say the heads in a Kef 107 / 105 using the next generation of Kef drivers (T33 and the polyprop B110) and you'll hear the extra speed and detail. Hard to do a direct comparison (especially these days with the drying of ferofluid in the T33) because of the cabinet difference but you can get a feel for how things got better.
Other than the mysticism and religion surrounding them in certain parts of the world, perhaps sound-wise they have a certain colouration that is appealing?
Compare them to say the heads in a Kef 107 / 105 using the next generation of Kef drivers (T33 and the polyprop B110) and you'll hear the extra speed and detail. Hard to do a direct comparison (especially these days with the drying of ferofluid in the T33) because of the cabinet difference but you can get a feel for how things got better.
Perhaps part of the mysticism is the fact that so many people started listening to them, and they became the norm? Many studios used Yamaha NS-10's simply because everyone used them. Were they the best monitors? No, but their consistent voicing and the fact that they were standard in most studios made them legendary.
The Yamaha NS10 Story
Btw, is this the bonafide LS3/5a (11ohm) XO?
The Yamaha NS10 Story
Btw, is this the bonafide LS3/5a (11ohm) XO?
Last edited:
That is quite simply impossible. A box that size with full baffle-step will always weigh in somewhere around 81-83dB/1W/1M. Hoffman's Iron Law is inviolable.
Monacor specify the sensitivity of the SPH-135AD mid/bass driver as 89dB (1W/m).
Wilmslow Audio would appear 'optimistic' in quoting that as the sensitivity of the completed LS3 Bookshelf Speaker.
what are the qualifications for a Rogers LS3/5A clone? Box size? Measurement (BBC dip)? Just a small monitor?
Speaker Design Works
Micro Statements Loudspeaker Kit - Meniscus Audio
Speaker Design Works
Micro Statements Loudspeaker Kit - Meniscus Audio
Here's the BBC report on the ls3/5 from their R&D department:
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf
I've read that Sound on Sound article before ... and, from memory, it contradicts what you say! You should read it, it's interesting and a good insight to what makes a good speaker.
I know this is completely off-topic, but regarding the NS-10 and potential NS-10 clones, I just spotted this:
New sonic match for Yamaha NS10 woofer
A company making claimed sonic match for the NS-10 mid range.
New sonic match for Yamaha NS10 woofer
A company making claimed sonic match for the NS-10 mid range.
And back to the conversation, the modern Graham version/clone uses a Volt mid-bass (might be uniquely supplied to Graham Audio? One could pretend to ask for spares perhaps?) and a Seas tweeter.
Graham Audio Chartwell LS3/5
Graham Audio Chartwell LS3/5