In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Second off: NEAR speakers were not widely distributed and only for a
relatively short period. The company was purchased by a larger entity
whose bean counters looked at the numbers from the hi fi market and
promptly shut that side of the business down. In much the same way that
many companies have done before them (Apogee, et al). The other, far
more obvious reason is that the NEAR 10M is so damned good that no owner
wants to sell them. I expect that mine will not leave my side for the
foreseeable future.

Given a company in the UK like Falcon - pretty small - has gone to the
bother of having things like the B110 and so on re-manufactured, and can
do complete kits to make your own 3/5a, wonder why they've not bothered to
re-manufacture this wonderful (and inexpensive) speaker of yours? If it
really is that good, would be a winner.

--
*Succeed, in spite of management *

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

On 12/04/2018 9:29 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Second off: NEAR speakers were not widely distributed and only for a
relatively short period. The company was purchased by a larger entity
whose bean counters looked at the numbers from the hi fi market and
promptly shut that side of the business down. In much the same way that
many companies have done before them (Apogee, et al). The other, far
more obvious reason is that the NEAR 10M is so damned good that no owner
wants to sell them. I expect that mine will not leave my side for the
foreseeable future.

Given a company in the UK like Falcon - pretty small - has gone to the
bother of having things like the B110 and so on re-manufactured, and can
do complete kits to make your own 3/5a, wonder why they've not bothered to
re-manufacture this wonderful (and inexpensive) speaker of yours? If it
really is that good, would be a winner.


**The NEAR drivers are unique and are what makes the speakers so
brilliant. They are also subject to a number of patents (which may, or
may not have run out). The KEF B110 driver, by comparison, is a very
simple thing to duplicate. Here's one NEAR patent:

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5335287

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

On 12/04/2018 00:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Apart, rather obviously, with the 3/5a which you describe as junk.
Whose designers should be shot. Without being able to give an example
of speaker designed at the same time which was better.

Don't think many loudspeaker manufacturers had an "on the tap" live
radio studio to help develop them..

Interesting point. I've never worked in radio, and dunno if the designers
made use of any of the facilities there. Apart from getting high quality
recordings of whatever they wanted, of course. The departments who
designed these speakers were both based well away from the studio centres.
I don't remember any prototype speakers doing the rounds in TV.

But then, to the best of my knowledge, the 3/5a wasn't used at TC for
monitoring. More an OB speaker. It may have been in some small edit
facilities, but not something I know about.

Do have a little story about them at TC, though.

TC3 was modernised in the early 70s. Went from an elderly BBC type B desk
to a large Neve. And at the same time had an all singing and dancing BBC
designed talkback system installed. And instead of the usual poor
bandwidth mics and amps etc, was designed to full broadcast quality.
Talkback mics were AKG 451, and the talkback speakers in sound control
LS3/5a. For all of a couple of weeks. Why? The quality was simply too
good. Just as good if not better than speech being broadcast, which could
used the same mics. And rather better if personal mics were in use.

The 3/5a were changed for single cone RS PA quality speakers. With the
typical colouration of a small cheap speaker.

Some said we told you so. Waste of money having excellent quality
talkback. But degrading it at the last moment at the speaker meant you
didn't have the usual noise and distortion etc of a badly designed system.


Don't know whether it is true or not but I was told (by Dickie
Chamberlain) that the change of speaker was to make it easy to
distinguish between talkback and programme material.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 12/04/2018 00:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Apart, rather obviously, with the 3/5a which you describe as junk.
Whose designers should be shot. Without being able to give an example
of speaker designed at the same time which was better.

Don't think many loudspeaker manufacturers had an "on the tap" live
radio studio to help develop them..

Interesting point. I've never worked in radio, and dunno if the designers
made use of any of the facilities there. Apart from getting high quality
recordings of whatever they wanted, of course. The departments who
designed these speakers were both based well away from the studio centres.
I don't remember any prototype speakers doing the rounds in TV.

But then, to the best of my knowledge, the 3/5a wasn't used at TC for
monitoring. More an OB speaker. It may have been in some small edit
facilities, but not something I know about.

Do have a little story about them at TC, though.

TC3 was modernised in the early 70s. Went from an elderly BBC type B
desk to a large Neve. And at the same time had an all singing and
dancing BBC designed talkback system installed. And instead of the
usual poor bandwidth mics and amps etc, was designed to full broadcast
quality. Talkback mics were AKG 451, and the talkback speakers in
sound control LS3/5a. For all of a couple of weeks. Why? The quality
was simply too good. Just as good if not better than speech being
broadcast, which could used the same mics. And rather better if
personal mics were in use.

The 3/5a were changed for single cone RS PA quality speakers. With the
typical colouration of a small cheap speaker.

Some said we told you so. Waste of money having excellent quality
talkback. But degrading it at the last moment at the speaker meant you
didn't have the usual noise and distortion etc of a badly designed
system.


Don't know whether it is true or not but I was told (by Dickie
Chamberlain) that the change of speaker was to make it easy to
distinguish between talkback and programme material.

Exactly so. Perhaps I didn't explain it well. You'd normally expect speech
coming from the prog speaker to be the highest quality and talkback
obvious by being less so.

When TC3 was initially refurbished, the monitoring speakers were BBC LS
5/1, and the 3/5a reproduced the human voice (at realistic levels) rather
better than it. The ubiquitous LS 5/8 was still some way off.

Richard was a superb sound mixer. The way he copied the commercial sound
of a pop record in the early 'live' days of TOTP with virtually no time to
rehearse was truly magical. Do you remember his supercharged Morris
Minor? ;-)

--
*Can fat people go skinny-dipping?

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

In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Given a company in the UK like Falcon - pretty small - has gone to the
bother of having things like the B110 and so on re-manufactured, and can
do complete kits to make your own 3/5a, wonder why they've not bothered
to re-manufacture this wonderful (and inexpensive) speaker of yours? If
it really is that good, would be a winner.

To be fair you have to consider that the B110 has been used in countless
designs over the year, far from just the LS3/5A. I could probably name at
least a dozen off the top of my head. Also, I'm pretty sure that at least
one of the people involved in Falcon was ex KEF.

All true.

But given Mr Wilson's insistence on how wonderful the NEAR was, it smacks
of some form of conspiracy to suppress it.

--
*The most common name in the world is Mohammed *

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

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Given a company in the UK like Falcon - pretty small - has gone to the
bother of having things like the B110 and so on re-manufactured, and
can do complete kits to make your own 3/5a, wonder why they've not
bothered to re-manufacture this wonderful (and inexpensive) speaker of
yours? If it really is that good, would be a winner.


**The NEAR drivers are unique and are what makes the speakers so
brilliant. They are also subject to a number of patents (which may, or
may not have run out). The KEF B110 driver, by comparison, is a very
simple thing to duplicate. Here's one NEAR patent:

So what? Unless you are trying to say something made 30 years ago can't be
reproduced today? Do they use unobtainium?

A patent for something no longer of commercial value is worthless too, BTW.

--
*The statement above is false

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

On 12/04/2018 11:05, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 12/04/2018 00:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Apart, rather obviously, with the 3/5a which you describe as junk.
Whose designers should be shot. Without being able to give an example
of speaker designed at the same time which was better.

Don't think many loudspeaker manufacturers had an "on the tap" live
radio studio to help develop them..

Interesting point. I've never worked in radio, and dunno if the designers
made use of any of the facilities there. Apart from getting high quality
recordings of whatever they wanted, of course. The departments who
designed these speakers were both based well away from the studio centres.
I don't remember any prototype speakers doing the rounds in TV.

But then, to the best of my knowledge, the 3/5a wasn't used at TC for
monitoring. More an OB speaker. It may have been in some small edit
facilities, but not something I know about.

Do have a little story about them at TC, though.

TC3 was modernised in the early 70s. Went from an elderly BBC type B
desk to a large Neve. And at the same time had an all singing and
dancing BBC designed talkback system installed. And instead of the
usual poor bandwidth mics and amps etc, was designed to full broadcast
quality. Talkback mics were AKG 451, and the talkback speakers in
sound control LS3/5a. For all of a couple of weeks. Why? The quality
was simply too good. Just as good if not better than speech being
broadcast, which could used the same mics. And rather better if
personal mics were in use.

The 3/5a were changed for single cone RS PA quality speakers. With the
typical colouration of a small cheap speaker.

Some said we told you so. Waste of money having excellent quality
talkback. But degrading it at the last moment at the speaker meant you
didn't have the usual noise and distortion etc of a badly designed
system.


Don't know whether it is true or not but I was told (by Dickie
Chamberlain) that the change of speaker was to make it easy to
distinguish between talkback and programme material.

Exactly so. Perhaps I didn't explain it well. You'd normally expect speech
coming from the prog speaker to be the highest quality and talkback
obvious by being less so.

When TC3 was initially refurbished, the monitoring speakers were BBC LS
5/1, and the 3/5a reproduced the human voice (at realistic levels) rather
better than it. The ubiquitous LS 5/8 was still some way off.

Richard was a superb sound mixer. The way he copied the commercial sound
of a pop record in the early 'live' days of TOTP with virtually no time to
rehearse was truly magical. Do you remember his supercharged Morris
Minor? ;-)


Oh yes!

I have my own story about Dickie. I used to belong to an amateur drama
club and they were doing a play called Night Must Fall. The director
wanted to set it in the last year of the death penalty in UK (relevant
to the plot). There's a Paul Robson song in it that she wanted to sound
like the early 60s but there was no commercial version available so Bill
Whiston and I rejigged it for electric guitars and drums. Bill asked
Dickie if we could borrow the TMS after a TOTP session and he agreed.
We turned up with our kit, just the two of us, and Dickie said we'd need
a hand on the faders so he stayed on and balanced it for us!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In article , Iain
scribeth thus
maanantai 9. huhtikuuta 2018 13.03.12 UTC+3 Bill Taylor kirjoitti:


I don't think you'll find many professionals using the LS3/5A. Even in
the BBC they were only used in certain specific circumstances and even
the BBC started using commercial powered speakers for the job that
they used to do many years ago.


One might infer from what Dave wrote that the LS3/5a was ubiquitous at the
BBC. It seems that this was by no means the case.

In an off-list message regarding this thread, a chap who was recording
music at the TV Centre from the day it opened until he retired, tells
me that that they had a variety of speakers. The LS3/5a was not used.
He also mentioned that this speaker was produced under licence from the
BBC by three manufacturers, and that one could differentiate between the
same speaker from different makers.

Iain




They would not have used the 5A's for recording music in a studio the
5/8 was more the one for that. 5A was for OB vans and the like thats
what it was designed for!.
--
Tony Sayer

Please sir Trevor if that was the case why aren't they going on fleabay
for a decent wedge like the old despised 5A's?..

**First off: I am an Australian and, thankfully, we have dispensed with
Royal honours.

Yess i had noticed

Second off: NEAR speakers were not widely distributed and only for a
relatively short period. The company was purchased by a larger entity
whose bean counters looked at the numbers from the hi fi market and
promptly shut that side of the business down. In much the same way that
many companies have done before them (Apogee, et al). The other, far
more obvious reason is that the NEAR 10M is so damned good that no owner
wants to sell them. I expect that mine will not leave my side for the
foreseeable future.


Well pity then that so very few were made..

[ASIDE] For one of my clients, I took a pair of NEAR 10M speakers and
removed the bits from the enclosure. I then commissioned a pair of cast
sand/resin enclosures, which, empty weighed in at around 22kg! I then
reassembled the boxes and installed the speakers into his listening
room. He still runs them, after more than 20 years. The client is in
shipping and has more money than God (if such a creature were to exist,
of course) and has the choice of any speaker.




I can't find any anywhere unless you can direct me?.

**Since they haven't been manufactured for some years, they will be hard
to locate.


Well none in the UK it seems..
--
Tony Sayer

tiistai 10. huhtikuuta 2018 17.06.49 UTC+3 Jim Lesurf kirjoitti:
By a quirk of economic history the UK now tends to mean
many people live and listen in small rooms at home that lack the acoustic
we might desire for better bigger speakers.

In the 1840's when the population of Gt Britain was 25 million, the Duke of
Wellington, whose address at the time was No.1 London, remarked that "our
country is somewhat overcrowded, and the traffic in London intolerable"

I wonder what he would think today:-) ?

Iain