What's up with this - Rogers LS3/5A???

[HipoFutura]

I saw a reference on another audio forum to Rogers LS3/5A speakers. They were shown great respect and reverence! When I searched ebay there were several for sale well in excess of $1K. I'm interested to hear a JBL enthusiasts opinion on these speakers. Don

[mech986]

Hi,

Well, one of the best places to get information on the BBC LS3/5a design is www.ls35a.com. This web site was created by Paul Whatton, son of Maurice Whatton who was a BBC Engineer who played a critical part in the LS3/5a design for commercialized production. The other lead engineers were H. Dudley Harwood, who would later found Harbeth, and R.W. Mills, a BBC engineer with fantastic hearing who helped to tweak the design.

As the Yahoo! LS3/5a Newsgroup moderator and a huge JBL fan as well, I think I can speak on it. The BBC LS3/5a design (built by Rogers and others) is an example of a finely tuned and well executed speaker that has had a tremendous following since its introduction in 1975.
What it does so well, within its specified and designed physically small size, is create a very liquid and listenable midrange that sounds palpably lifelike with quite precise imaging. It has a mid bass bump that creates the illusion of bass response and make the speaker an acceptable drive for a small space or room. This was done by using standard off the shelf KEF bextrene drivers (specially selected to BBC specification though) and a very complex crossover/equalizer that provided accuracy at the expense of power handling and sensitivity. It is a quintessential example of 1970's-80's British speaker/monitor design.

A famous quote about the LS3/5a - most would argue about what is the BEST speaker ever made. However, many people would state that the LS3/5a is the best second best speaker out there. Of course, with its small size (shoebox), it really cannot play low and play loud. But within its abilities, it can sound very very good. And a lot of people, rightly or wrongly have ascribed a certain mystique to them.

AS a JBL enthusiast, I really like the dynamic, almost effortless ability of most JBL speakers. They are many times really, palpably, big, strong, sensitive, and can play the frequency extremes well. However, many think that certains JBL's can be strident, harsh, too forward, or otherwise somewhat lacking on imaging or ultimate accuracy (well at least until the LSR series).

It has always amused me that I really like the teeny LS3/5a along with the 4333 or larger JBL Monitor. However, if you listen to both of them, they both have strengths and weaknesses. That's the fun of following both. It's all good!!!

Regards,

Bart

Happy to answer LS3/5a questions.

[HipoFutura]

Bart, Thank you for the well written explaination! The LS3/5a sounds like a very nice speaker system. It's always interesting to see what develops a cult following or interest group. Things Brittish seem to fall into this quite often. Their cars (Triumph, MG, Healy, Rovers, etc.), their bikes (Triumph, BSA, Norton, Enfield, etc.), their china, and the list goes on.

The LS3/5A brings a remarkable price on the used market. One more thing to add to my list of "Look for These" when I'm at a yard sale or Salvation Army store.

Don

[Tom Brennan]

The LS3/5A started the unfortunate trend of clueless "high end" types calling small 2-ways "monitors".

[Mr. Widget]

AS a JBL enthusiast, I really like the dynamic...

It has always amused me that I really like the teeny LS3/5a along with the 4333 or larger JBL Monitor. However, if you listen to both of them, they both have strengths and weaknesses. That's the fun of following both. It's all good!!!An excellent post... and not just because I agree with you. :applaud:


One more thing to add to my list of "Look for These" when I'm at a yard sale or Salvation Army store. Good luck... I've been waiting to stumble upon a pair for decades... too many people know what they are and they were never as common as say an L100.


The LS3/5A started the unfortunate trend of clueless "high end" types calling small 2-ways "monitors".Just another name... the LS3/5A was a true monitor... hell, it was designed by the BBC and not a particular speaker manufacturer. If people want to call a class of tiny two-ways, mini-monitors, I see no harm in that. The term monitor really has no definitive meaning these days anyway. Consumers and manufacturers a like throw the term around rather carelessly.


Widget

[mech986]

The LS3/5A started the unfortunate trend of clueless "high end" types calling small 2-ways "monitors".

Tom, you may be correct in the general statement of other small speakers that followed the LS3/5a design (or predated it for that matter) being incorrectly labeled as "monitors". However the LS3/5a itself and all of the BBC's LS series speaker designs were rightly called monitors, although each designation was for a specific application and quality level.

This is similar to JBL's use of the terms "Control" monitors and "Studio" monitors to connote their relative accuracy and application.

The LS3/xx series were for application specific monitoring of sound quality. The LS3/5a was primarily used for small outside broadcast vans where space was at a super premium but the speaker had to be able to give most of the information needed to determine if the broadcast was reasonably accurate.

Here's the BBC research publication detailing the LS3/5a's evolution.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf

The LS5/xx series were for larger venues like studios or recording areas where the absolute quality of the signal was examined and balance changes could be made on that basis. As classical music was supplanted by pop and then high volume rock and roll, the BBC had to design ever larger or more powerful monitors for its own internal use. The LS5/8, LS5/9, and LS5/12 are examples of the evolution of BBC monitors. These speakers came in passive and active amplified versions to fit varied applicaitions.

Here's the BBC research publication on the LS5/8. Note that their two way speaker pushes highest accuracy with reasonable sensitivity, although Ultimate DB SPL lags JBL monitors of the time.
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1979-22.pdf

As you may also guess, the dynamics and voicing of US and British monitors are significantly different (then and somewhat now).

Here's the BBC research publication on the LS5/9, a medium size (1 cu.ft) monitor:
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1983-10.pdf

Regards,

Bart

[Tom Brennan]

"the LS3/5A was a true monitor..."

Yes, that's well known.

"If people want to call a class of tiny two-ways mini-monitors, I see no harm in that."

Yes, but now they've dropped the mini part and call small speakers monitors. It's imprecision in language, a bad thing. If you talk now to the average high-end type jasper about, oh let's say a 4435, by referring to it as a monitor he'll have a totally wrong concept and you'll have to set him straight. This will soon lead to a long diatribe going back to the 604, RCA LC-1, JBLs at Capitol, BBC recording vans and so on.

Which is fun but could have been avoided.

[Mr. Widget]

Yes, but now they've dropped the mini part and call small speakers monitors.
I guess I haven't run into that... I've always heard the small two-ways referred to as either, that cheap little speaker over there or that mini-monitor...

In any event with all of the confusion in audio, about the relative importance of say your power cords or the speaker cables, I guess I just don't see the mis labeling of speaker types as such a great sin.


Widget

[Tom Brennan]

Mech----Useful information, thank you.

I remember that LS 5/8 12" 2-way. At the time I copied the idea of the dispersion slot in front of the woofer on a couple of my 12" 2-way DIY projects.

[Tom Brennan]

"In any event with all of the confusion in audio, about the relative importance of say your power cords or the speaker cables, I guess I just don't see the mis labeling of speaker types as such a great sin."

Amen to that Widget.

Just one of my pet peeves.

As was said of John Ford, he had too many pet peeves to have any time for the conventional prejudices. ;-)

[Wornears]

Having owned JBLs for the past 30 years, when I found a pair of Linn Kans (derived from the LS3/5A) in a pawn shop a couple of years ago I did not know what sort of speaker they were. For $25 I figured I'd find out.

Likely the best bang for buck on audio sonics I'll ever spend. Even though it seems the Kans are derided somewhat as a not so good knock-off of the original LS3/5A (say compared to Harbeth or Rogers), the Kans have that amazing liquid midrange and smooth highs. While the LS3/5A are said to benefit from being placed away from a wall, the Kans do best about 3--5-in. away to bring up the bass.

Over time my NHT SuperOnes and 1Cs (which are more JBL-like than a Kan ever will be), won out for sound (but not for looks -- my Kans were in teak). I eventually sold the Kans for much (much) more than I paid this year.

It was a bittersweet parting -- I really liked their British voicing (led me to not pass on some KEFs I found at a thrift a few months ago) -- and there is no speaker made that I know off that produces so much quality sound out of such a small form.

[DavidF]

I saw a reference on another audio forum to Rogers LS3/5A speakers. They were shown great respect and reverence! When I searched ebay there were several for sale well in excess of $1K. I'm interested to hear a JBL enthusiasts opinion on these speakers. Don

There is an underlying parallel with the design and domestication of the LS3/5A speakers and the JBL 4310 and family.


Both originally purpose built for commercial monitoring in limited-space locations. Each model migrated to the home in large numbers.
Both enjoyed long production runs (the LS3/5A had a very long run indeed).
Both became de facto icons for distinct groups of sound enthusiasts. In contrast these models were polar opposites in terms of the choices of compromises that exist in all speaker designs. The primary focus in the design of the LS3/5A seems to be uncolored and tonally correct midrange all contained in a small package. As well stated above the compromise was very limited bandwidth, lack of detail, and dynamics. For reproduction of the human voice, stage productions, etc., the reputation is well earned. Jimi Hendrix or London Philharmonic, no thanks.

For some audiophiles the qualities of the LS3/5A in tonality and imaging surpassed their compromises in dynamics and bandwidth to such an extent that their faults were acceptable as part of the bargain. The same consideration was not afforded the L100 in the audiophile world.

DavidF

[salpe]

Hi, I read this forum but I don't post a lot. I'm italian so writing in english is not easy for me.
In this case, as owner of a couple of Jbl 4333B and a couple of Rogers Ls3/5a (15 ohm version, the originale one) I'll try to give some indications.

My father bought the 4333 new some 25 years ago (it was a present for me and for himself, but I know he really bought them for me and I'm still affected today, thank you daddy) and they are my personal reference speakers without discussion. Really the greatest part of other speakers I've heard in all these years didn't impress me very much. Of course there are exceptions, but you can count them on the fingers of one hand (and the price is very very high).
Then, about 20 years ago, I had to move for working reasons and I was in search of a little "portable" speaker (a monitor, of course) to hear to music at low volume in a decent way. In this search I was really shocked by the "shoes boxes", i.e. Ls3/5a.
They are great in imaging: the speakers really disappear and what you SEE is a very very deep soundstage with all musical instruments inside. The soundstage is formed between the speakers in such a way that you sometime don't understand what is the reason to keep those tiny speakers on stands in the middle of all that instruments. Infact your brain says that if you move tham away you can see better! Music comes from space, not from speakers.
Jbl are not at that level in imaging, even if on my opinion they can perform under this particular aspect much better than 90% of the rest of the world (and in a very good way considering the size). But Ls3/5a is (for me) among the first five systems ever built under this respect. The only problem is that the image is quite low.
Another point of excellence is the smoothness of mid-low and mid frequencies; high frequency are not so good and sometime harsh. Another point in which Ls3/5a are very good is the "velocity" of sound and the micro-dynamic.
The points in which they are really poor is the bass, the overall dynamic, the maximum SPL (95 db SPL maximum or you destroy them). But the project is so clever that all these deficiencies are mixed together in a sort of good way, so that, for example, the bass is poor but in a small room it can be enough without causing resonances. The result is not a truncated frequency response but a sort of "shrinking" effect on instruments, something acceptable in a small room.
I think Ls3/5a are a very good compromise and a real monitor: but if you like the real thing, and you have the right room, Jbl 4333 are incomparably better overall.
At the end I've changed lots of speakers, but what remained home are 4333, ls3/5a and Quad Esl 57, three completely different systems (in three different rooms and set-ups) but really three legends in the history of music reproduction.
Kind regards
Salvatore

[JohanR]

I to has the somewhat unlikely combination of JBL and LS3/5a speakers.

My Chartwell LS3/5a's was the first HiFi speakers I bought, in 1978, I was 20 then. I couldn't have guessed then that thirty years into future they would be still concidered one of the worlds greatest speakers. Today I use them in my second "Home TV" system. BBC makes the best TV programs in the world and with LS3/5a's I know that they sound as they should do :)

Since then I've had plenty of different speakers, currently a pair of L65A's resides in my music room and I simply love them for their effortless and dynamic reproduction of any music thrown at them!

JohanR

[Thom]

As long as someone started this I've always wanted an opinion from someone not trying to sell me something of the + and - of the aforementioned rogers speakers vs the JR's that were later built into aluminium tubing with wooden ends the JR obviously standing for____

[Fish]

Hello outhere,
new to this club and am wondering if anybody has heard of/know somethings about Rogers Studio 2 speakers-have found very little about these beautiful sounding beasties and am interested in histroy of/reviews/info on them.
thanx for any replies, Fish

[hjames]

Only thing I found when I googled them was the info below on AudioGone -
Looks like a response to your question posted Jan 27 there ...


Hello outhere,
new to this club and am wondering if anybody has heard of/know somethings about Rogers Studio 2 speakers-have found very little about these beautiful sounding beasties and am interested in histroy of/reviews/info on them.
thanx for any replies, Fish

02-20-07: davec ([email protected])
I have a pair of these speakers, about 20 years ago a friend got an x Rogers cabinet builder to make them and we brought the speakers, crossovers and made them as a hobby the factory was in Mitcham surrey and the company was called Swisstone Electronics LTD it closed down about 16 years ago. I have a product information document for Rogers Studio 2a ...