Kef B110
 

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
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.

Things like the voicing of a speaker are always down to personal choice,
but imaging ain't. And neither is colouration.

If Trevor genuinely found a pair of 3/5a to have poor imaging, they were
faulty.

--
*CAN AN ATHEIST GET INSURANCE AGAINST ACTS OF GOD?

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

Kef B110
 

In article , Trevor Wilson
wrote:
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.

People might take your assertions about the LS3/5A more seriously if you
dealt with his actual question.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Kef B110
 

On 16/12/2015 11:42 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
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.

Things like the voicing of a speaker are always down to personal choice,
but imaging ain't. And neither is colouration.

If Trevor genuinely found a pair of 3/5a to have poor imaging, they were
faulty.


**I didn't find _a_ pair of LS3/5a speakers with poor imaging. I found
EVERY pair of LS3/5a speakers to possess poor imaging.

--
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 2015-12-17 01:11:46 +0000, Trevor Wilson said:

On 16/12/2015 11:42 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
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.

Things like the voicing of a speaker are always down to personal choice,
but imaging ain't. And neither is colouration.

If Trevor genuinely found a pair of 3/5a to have poor imaging, they were
faulty.


**I didn't find _a_ pair of LS3/5a speakers with poor imaging. I found
EVERY pair of LS3/5a speakers to possess poor imaging.

What did the poor imaging sound like, e.g. narrow sound field,
instruments moving their positions, piano bass and treble swapping
over, or what?


Arthur

--
real email arthur at bellacat dot com

Kef B110
 

Trevor Wilson wrote:




**You've never heard the old saying:

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


** Funny you should bring that up.

I was thinking how many home hi-fi speakers JBL sold by associating them closely with their famous Studio Monitors. The very similar Century L100 and the 4310 monitor comes to mind.

http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/jbl/l100.htm

Both speakers were outstanding examples of every fault is was possible to build into a three way design.

In the early 70s, I worked in a store where a pair of L100s was on permanent demo set up next to a pair of Kef Kit 3s, aka Kef Concertos. Every customer wanted to hear the famous JBLs and were then were invited to hear the Kefs on the same material. There was simply no comparison and the store sold a lot of KK3s, including a pair to me.

BTW:

I am aware the LS3/5A use the same B110 and T27 tweeter as the KK3.


..... Phil

Kef B110
 

On 17/12/2015 12:58 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:




**You've never heard the old saying:

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


** Funny you should bring that up.

I was thinking how many home hi-fi speakers JBL sold by associating
them closely with their famous Studio Monitors. The very similar
Century L100 and the 4310 monitor comes to mind.

http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/jbl/l100.htm

Both speakers were outstanding examples of every fault is was
possible to build into a three way design.

In the early 70s, I worked in a store where a pair of L100s was on
permanent demo set up next to a pair of Kef Kit 3s, aka Kef
Concertos. Every customer wanted to hear the famous JBLs and were
then were invited to hear the Kefs on the same material. There was
simply no comparison and the store sold a lot of KK3s, including a
pair to me.

BTW:

I am aware the LS3/5A use the same B110 and T27 tweeter as the KK3.



**And they were pretty decent drivers in the late 1960s/early 1970s.
Sadly, many of the proponents of the LS3/5A seem to be living in the
past. FWIW: I also owned a set of Concerto drivers (purchased from
Whatsisname White, from Kent Hi Fi) , but screwed them into a Bailey
transmission line and used the very excellent Radford crossovers. Good
that they were (for the early 1970s), I have moved on. As should the
LS3/5A devotees.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Kef B110
 

On 17/12/2015 12:30 PM, Arthur Quinn wrote:
On 2015-12-17 01:11:46 +0000, Trevor Wilson said:

On 16/12/2015 11:42 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
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.

Things like the voicing of a speaker are always down to personal choice,
but imaging ain't. And neither is colouration.

If Trevor genuinely found a pair of 3/5a to have poor imaging, they were
faulty.


**I didn't find _a_ pair of LS3/5a speakers with poor imaging. I found
EVERY pair of LS3/5a speakers to possess poor imaging.

What did the poor imaging sound like, e.g. narrow sound field,
instruments moving their positions, piano bass and treble swapping over,
or what?

**Specifically, the image is vague. More specifically, the HF response
is ragged, due to the diffraction problems associated with the crappy
enclosure design.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/f...zpUKRRuACll.97



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Kef B110
 

Trevor Wilson wrote:


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


** Funny you should bring that up.

I was thinking how many home hi-fi speakers JBL sold by associating
them closely with their famous Studio Monitors. The very similar
Century L100 and the 4310 monitor comes to mind.

http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/jbl/l100.htm

Both speakers were outstanding examples of every fault is was
possible to build into a three way design.

In the early 70s, I worked in a store where a pair of L100s was on
permanent demo set up next to a pair of Kef Kit 3s, aka Kef
Concertos. Every customer wanted to hear the famous JBLs and were
then were invited to hear the Kefs on the same material. There was
simply no comparison and the store sold a lot of KK3s, including a
pair to me.

BTW:

I am aware the LS3/5A use the same B110 and T27 tweeter as the KK3.



**And they were pretty decent drivers in the late 1960s/early 1970s.
Sadly, many of the proponents of the LS3/5A seem to be living in the
past. FWIW: I also owned a set of Concerto drivers (purchased from
Whatsisname White, from Kent Hi Fi) , but screwed them into a Bailey
transmission line and used the very excellent Radford crossovers. Good
that they were (for the early 1970s), I have moved on. As should the
LS3/5A devotees.


** That would be Michael White, who later formed "Sound on Stage" with his pal Robert Rose. Hard to say which of them was the more self opinionated or out of touch with reality.

The DN12 x-over that came with KK3s and Concertos was very ordinary, using cheap electro caps and ferrite core inductors. So I made clones using all polyester caps and air core chokes from Aegis - the expensive, beehive shaped ones.

The clones made the KK3s sound so different ( brighter and much cleaner ) I had to double check them carefully for a possible error and found none.

The supplied cabinets were made from 18mm particle board and a bit resonant, so I glued lots of 6" square ceramic tiles inside to stiffen and add mass to the panels. Boy did that work a treat too. The end result compared favourably with the far more expensive Celestion 66s, when compared in a dealer's basement sound room.

In 1975 I acquired a pair of second hand ESL57s, soon realised the sound quality was in another league and sold the Kefs for a small profit.



..... Phil

Kef B110
 

On 17/12/2015 4:19 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:


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


** Funny you should bring that up.

I was thinking how many home hi-fi speakers JBL sold by
associating them closely with their famous Studio Monitors. The
very similar Century L100 and the 4310 monitor comes to mind.

http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/jbl/l100.htm

Both speakers were outstanding examples of every fault is was
possible to build into a three way design.

In the early 70s, I worked in a store where a pair of L100s was
on permanent demo set up next to a pair of Kef Kit 3s, aka Kef
Concertos. Every customer wanted to hear the famous JBLs and
were then were invited to hear the Kefs on the same material.
There was simply no comparison and the store sold a lot of KK3s,
including a pair to me.

BTW:

I am aware the LS3/5A use the same B110 and T27 tweeter as the
KK3.



**And they were pretty decent drivers in the late 1960s/early
1970s. Sadly, many of the proponents of the LS3/5A seem to be
living in the past. FWIW: I also owned a set of Concerto drivers
(purchased from Whatsisname White, from Kent Hi Fi) , but screwed
them into a Bailey transmission line and used the very excellent
Radford crossovers. Good that they were (for the early 1970s), I
have moved on. As should the LS3/5A devotees.


** That would be Michael White, who later formed "Sound on Stage"
with his pal Robert Rose. Hard to say which of them was the more self
opinionated or out of touch with reality.

**Michael seemed to have a bit of a God complex back then. He was
certainly the guy to buy stuff off, when visiting Kent Hi Fi. Robert
Rose. I haven't heard his name in many years. Was he with EV for a time?


The DN12 x-over that came with KK3s and Concertos was very ordinary,
using cheap electro caps and ferrite core inductors. So I made
clones using all polyester caps and air core chokes from Aegis - the
expensive, beehive shaped ones.

The clones made the KK3s sound so different ( brighter and much
cleaner ) I had to double check them carefully for a possible error
and found none.

**Doesn't surprise me. The Radfords were MUCH more sophisticated than
the DN12s. Air cored inductors, some plastic caps and, most critically,
a parallel resonant notch filter to remove the nasty edge termination
problems with the early B110 drivers (just short out for later B110
variants).


The supplied cabinets were made from 18mm particle board and a bit
resonant, so I glued lots of 6" square ceramic tiles inside to
stiffen and add mass to the panels. Boy did that work a treat too.
The end result compared favourably with the far more expensive
Celestion 66s, when compared in a dealer's basement sound room.

**The box is certainly critical. Me and my old man built my T-lines and
I used them for about a year in raw chipboard form. They sounded great.
When it came time to tart them up, I decided that white Laminex™ would
look nice. Who'd a thunk that they would take a huge leap forward in
sound quality? Not me, but they sounded a lot better with the Laminex™.
It seems I had discovered constrained layer construction. I used to run
them with my Marantz Model 500 (300+ Watts @ 8 Ohms). They survived the
ordeal, without any major problems, except for one B139. The wire
connecting to the voice coil failed. It appeared to be every so slightly
out of spec during manufacture. Fortunately, the B139 is probably the
easiest bass driver on the planet to repair.


In 1975 I acquired a pair of second hand ESL57s, soon realised the
sound quality was in another league and sold the Kefs for a small
profit.

**Well, yeah. No comparison.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Kef B110
 

Trevor Wilson wrote:



** That would be Michael White, who later formed "Sound on Stage"
with his pal Robert Rose. Hard to say which of them was the more self
opinionated or out of touch with reality.

**Michael seemed to have a bit of a God complex back then. He was
certainly the guy to buy stuff off, when visiting Kent Hi Fi.


** That's where I first heard the phrase "Junk But Loud !"

A young Asian sale said to me it while pointing at some of L100s - then got told off by boss Peter Dertz.




**The box is certainly critical. Me and my old man built my T-lines and
I used them for about a year in raw chipboard form. They sounded great.
When it came time to tart them up, I decided that white Laminex(tm) would
look nice. Who'd a thunk that they would take a huge leap forward in
sound quality? Not me, but they sounded a lot better with the Laminex(tm).
It seems I had discovered constrained layer construction.



** Must have wound up looking like a pair of Sonabs.

http://www.samlaren.org/radioapparater/sonab12.jpg



..... Phil