Kef B110
 

On 14/12/2015 4:19 AM, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Eiron
wrote:
The LS3/5A is/was the most over-rated speaker of all time. Muddy,
poor imaging and just plain average.

Here's another secret: your secret never was a secret.

If Stuart was still here he would tell us that the image from a
bextrene cone collapses at low levels.

The main thing about the LS3/5a was the quality control. They all
sounded the same, if equally mediocre.

Right - so you're saying there are better similar speakers around - but
they don't all sound the same? ;-)

For broadcasting use consistency of the monitor speakers is important.
And that's what they were designed for.

FWIW I quite like both the LS3/5A and the current Stirling 'near
equivalent'. But I tend to prefer the 'BBC' sound, and use them with an amp
that has ye olde tone controls.

**This is where you and I differ in our preferences. I have no used tone
controls in almost 40 years and regard the LS3/5A as nothing more than a
doorstop.


And given the space, etc, prefer ESLs. :-)

**And here is where it gets weird. A pair of stacked ESL57s or a nice
pair of ESL63s is something I can live with. Easily.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Kef B110
 

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Quite willing to accept there may be something better out there - given
the design is so old.

**Hang on a sec. That is exactly the problem. On release, the LS3/5A was
probably an OK speaker. 30 years ago, the LS3/5A was easily eclipsed by
better designs. The LS3/5A should have been consigned to the dustbin
decades ago. The fans of the speakers really have no clue about an
accurate loudspeaker system. They cling to a sound which is highly
coloured and can no longer be regarded as 'high fidelity'.


But grim? Perhaps you'd tell us what you consider good? ;-)


**See if you can locate a pair of NEAR 10M-II speakers. American made,
very inexpensive and accurate. They're nudging 20 years old now and they
never fail to delight. I will likely be buried with mine. No longer made
though. There are others. Some of the old Celestions from the 1980s were
a vastly more sophisticated and accurate design than the LS3/5A.

Be interesting to do some proper blind testing of speakers with you,
Trevor. Could be fun. ;-)

--
*Why is the word abbreviation so long?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Kef B110
 

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**And here is where it gets weird. A pair of stacked ESL57s or a nice
pair of ESL63s is something I can live with. Easily.

Are you really comparing things big enough to block out all the light into
a room with bookshelf speakers? ;-)

--
*Many hamsters only blink one eye at a time *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Kef B110
 

On 15/12/2015 11:37 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**And here is where it gets weird. A pair of stacked ESL57s or a nice
pair of ESL63s is something I can live with. Easily.

Are you really comparing things big enough to block out all the light into
a room with bookshelf speakers? ;-)


**Where did you gain that idea from? That said, I would happily place my
NEAR 10M-IIs up against a pair of ESL63s. Yes, they are THAT good. I
should add that the ESL63s would beat them in a few areas.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Kef B110
 

On 15/12/2015 11:36 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Quite willing to accept there may be something better out there - given
the design is so old.

**Hang on a sec. That is exactly the problem. On release, the LS3/5A was
probably an OK speaker. 30 years ago, the LS3/5A was easily eclipsed by
better designs. The LS3/5A should have been consigned to the dustbin
decades ago. The fans of the speakers really have no clue about an
accurate loudspeaker system. They cling to a sound which is highly
coloured and can no longer be regarded as 'high fidelity'.


But grim? Perhaps you'd tell us what you consider good? ;-)


**See if you can locate a pair of NEAR 10M-II speakers. American made,
very inexpensive and accurate. They're nudging 20 years old now and they
never fail to delight. I will likely be buried with mine. No longer made
though. There are others. Some of the old Celestions from the 1980s were
a vastly more sophisticated and accurate design than the LS3/5A.

Be interesting to do some proper blind testing of speakers with you,
Trevor. Could be fun. ;-)


**Depends on your idea of fun. If you don't mind your deluded view of
the LS3/5A being shredded, then yes, it could be fun.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Kef B110
 

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Be interesting to do some proper blind testing of speakers with you,
Trevor. Could be fun. ;-)


**Depends on your idea of fun. If you don't mind your deluded view of
the LS3/5A being shredded, then yes, it could be fun.

I don't have a deluded view of any loudspeaker.

But am always suspicious of those who positively hate one which is well
regarded using a description like "Muddy, poor imaging and just plain
average." when that is simply rubbish.

To me, that would only fit a pair which was faulty.

--
*No word in the English language rhymes with month, orange, silver,purple

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Kef B110
 

On 15/12/2015 10:42 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Be interesting to do some proper blind testing of speakers with you,
Trevor. Could be fun. ;-)


**Depends on your idea of fun. If you don't mind your deluded view of
the LS3/5A being shredded, then yes, it could be fun.

I don't have a deluded view of any loudspeaker.

**Then you need to compare the LS3/5A to almost any modern, decent,
small speaker (built within the last, say, 25 years). The faults in the
LS3/5A design will be instantly apparent.


But am always suspicious of those who positively hate one which is well
regarded using a description like "Muddy, poor imaging and just plain
average." when that is simply rubbish.

To me, that would only fit a pair which was faulty.


**You've never heard the old saying:

'No studio designer was ever sacked for specifying JBL monitors.'

Like I said befo The LS3/5A can be likened to 'The Emperor's New
Clothes'. They are just a very average speaker, with a range of problems
which could be (largely) solved. It's just that many people expect a
certain level of mediocrity, so the design doesn't change. Using an
automotive analogy, I prefer to drive a 2015 Ford Focus, rather than a
1953 Ford Prefect (my old man owned one). Clearly, your opinion differs
from mine.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Kef B110
 

In article , Trevor Wilson trevor@SPA
MBLOCKrageaudio.com.au scribeth thus
On 15/12/2015 10:42 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Be interesting to do some proper blind testing of speakers with you,
Trevor. Could be fun. ;-)


**Depends on your idea of fun. If you don't mind your deluded view of
the LS3/5A being shredded, then yes, it could be fun.

I don't have a deluded view of any loudspeaker.

**Then you need to compare the LS3/5A to almost any modern, decent,
small speaker (built within the last, say, 25 years). The faults in the
LS3/5A design will be instantly apparent.


But am always suspicious of those who positively hate one which is well
regarded using a description like "Muddy, poor imaging and just plain
average." when that is simply rubbish.


Can you be more specific please as the pair i have in front of me are
anything but muddy or have poor imaging.

So what built within the last 25 years should we be comparing them with
then?.


--
Tony Sayer

Kef B110
 

On 16/12/2015 6:51 AM, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Trevor Wilson trevor@SPA
MBLOCKrageaudio.com.au scribeth thus
On 15/12/2015 10:42 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Be interesting to do some proper blind testing of speakers with you,
Trevor. Could be fun. ;-)


**Depends on your idea of fun. If you don't mind your deluded view of
the LS3/5A being shredded, then yes, it could be fun.

I don't have a deluded view of any loudspeaker.

**Then you need to compare the LS3/5A to almost any modern, decent,
small speaker (built within the last, say, 25 years). The faults in the
LS3/5A design will be instantly apparent.


But am always suspicious of those who positively hate one which is well
regarded using a description like "Muddy, poor imaging and just plain
average." when that is simply rubbish.


Can you be more specific please as the pair i have in front of me are
anything but muddy or have poor imaging.

**Then you need to get out (much) more.


So what built within the last 25 years should we be comparing them with
then?.

**The NEAR 10M-II comes to mind, but there are many others. Some of the
offerings from Celestion, KEF, B&W, Monitor Audio provide performance
that the LS3/5A cannot hope to achieve.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Kef B110
 

In article , Trevor Wilson trevor@SPA
MBLOCKrageaudio.com.au scribeth thus
On 16/12/2015 6:51 AM, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Trevor Wilson trevor@SPA
MBLOCKrageaudio.com.au scribeth thus
On 15/12/2015 10:42 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Be interesting to do some proper blind testing of speakers with you,
Trevor. Could be fun. ;-)


**Depends on your idea of fun. If you don't mind your deluded view of
the LS3/5A being shredded, then yes, it could be fun.

I don't have a deluded view of any loudspeaker.

**Then you need to compare the LS3/5A to almost any modern, decent,
small speaker (built within the last, say, 25 years). The faults in the
LS3/5A design will be instantly apparent.


But am always suspicious of those who positively hate one which is well
regarded using a description like "Muddy, poor imaging and just plain
average." when that is simply rubbish.


Can you be more specific please as the pair i have in front of me are
anything but muddy or have poor imaging.

**Then you need to get out (much) more.

I do Trevor, to a lot of concerts and recordings and the like:)



So what built within the last 25 years should we be comparing them with
then?.

**The NEAR 10M-II comes to mind, but there are many others. Some of the
offerings from Celestion, KEF, B&W, Monitor Audio provide performance
that the LS3/5A cannot hope to achieve.

Any same size models you'd like to specify in that list and the
differences?.




--
Tony Sayer