Rogers LS3/5a (BBC) Speaker Review

[Ajax]

I've had a used pair of the LS3/5A's since the mid 1980's.

Yes, I am old.

Paid $300 Canadian, which seemed like way too much back then.

On the back, nominal impedance 15 ohms, serial number 5064, and inside date stamped Juy 17, 1978.

I found out in the late 1990's that they really aren't for rock, and blew one of the drivers. Couldn't get a replacement driver back then and shelved them.

Replaced them with a pair of Thiel CS .5's.

But recently, with the help of Jerry at Falcon Acoustics, I replaced both drivers in the Rogers with a matched pair, just for fun.

As noted in an earlier post, they are really good for chamber music and vocals. For performers like Sade, Frank Sinatra and Irma Thomas, you can really feel like you are right there, in a smoke filled club. You can feel the timbre of the vocals, and the performers fingers sliding on the strings of the stand up base. Wind instruments are great too.

Thanks Amir for the recommended EQ settings. I'm using Steelseries GG for EQ and it's really easy to implement your recommendations.

Very much appreciated.

Hi Bob,

Was the effect of Amir's EQ settings significant?

Apologies if that is a loaded question as I assume you can't A/B and there would also have to be some sighted biased attached.

 

[Toni Mas]

New, it costs US $4895 a pair.

Legends cost money! But in the eighties the price was much lower. I don't remember exactly, but though not entry level, it was quite affordable. My dad bought a pair of JR149, similar design with same woofer tweeter and xover.

I find predicted in room response quite good, though the tonal balance will be light if placement free standing as become fashionable now among audiophiles. Imho, it is a near field monitor designed for desktop placement which will provide the necessary bass boost through boundary reinforcement. At home we used it wall mounted and the tonal balance was excellent.

 

[Phorize]

nearfield for voice in a van, isn't that their original purpose ?

It was, and it's worth bearing in mind that when this example was made one could buy an actual van for less than the cost of the speaker.

 

[Matt_Holland]

Having seen these measurements now, though, I sort of understand the appeal. This must be the infamous "BBC dip"? I have found that cutting those frequencies can make something sound like the bass has solidified, honkiness and boxiness go away, and the midrange is clear and clean. That is, when there is too much energy between about 200 and 500hz, it can be unpleasant. This speaker makes sure to never encounter that issue. So I am not surprised that some people fall in love with this (technically very wrong) tonality.

Apologies if this has already been commented on. The “BBC dip” is between 2KHz and 4KHz, not 200-500Hz. The midrange dip I believe was there to account for the boost given by the baffle effect caused by the ear speakers being placed on a mixing console/desk.

The actual BBC dip was deliberately applied to reduce listener fatigue. I suspect one reason was that engineers needed to use these for prolonged periods in a noisy environment (portable studio for broadcast) and so listened at high volume levels to overcome background noise. The dip at 2-4K takes the edge off any nasty vocal effects or forwardness.

From a hifi perspective the dip is often used to give a sense of a deeper soundstage, particularly in placing vocals behind the plane of the speakers. Some people like that.

 

[Purité Audio]

If it wasn’t bad enough that ASR has destroyed the reputation of every U.K. hi-fi manufacturer , now it’s the BBC’s turn, is nothing sacrosanct !
Keith

 

[fpitas]

In the Bebe's defense, they had no idea that punters would want these for hi-fi.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

I think the whole BBC discussion completely misses the point. The purpose of this test is not to assess or judge what the BBC did or not some 30 or 40 years ago, but to give today's buyers, who can still buy clones / derivatives of this design, the facts to make an informed buying decision of its sound (frequency response).

Meaning, if I am a buyer today and I don`t have a broadcasting van, but want to use this speaker domestically, this (and also previous data) showed that this speaker might not be for me (unless I buy it for nostalgic or collector reasons, but those are different objectives).

What is problematic to me is, that some audiophile circles make them into something magical (and implying domestic use) and driving up prices, when it is clear (also from the initial design) that it is not intended nor fit for that use.

 

[Toni Mas]

In the Bebe's defense, they had no idea that punters would want these for hi-fi.

But this demand was quickly detected and the Rogers AB1 subwoofer has been launched as a floor standing combo...

The Unofficial LS3/5A Support Site

​

 

[uwotm8]

but to give today's buyers, who can still buy clones / derivatives of this design, the facts to make an informed buying decision of its sound (frequency response)

Well, now is the time to explain how measurements of that exact 40 y.o. Rogers 3/5 sample gives anyone the idea of, say, new Harbeth version of "same model" sound.
Current models are Harbeth (or Spendor etc) re-re-re-vision of "LS 3/5 sound" at first. New dense cabinets. New drivers. Crossover components which do not affect sound for sure (go go go do ABX of that tweeter sound with different caps lol)/ And many other stuff.

Judging current LS3/5s by what measured above is

 

[raindance]

Now take 3dB at least away from the 120Hz bump which should give you some idea of the proper bass response!!!

The P3ESR may have a lifted top, but it's so sweet toned and well integrated in this model - NO TINSEL and beautiful on brushed cymbals! The ESR's bass is also in a different league in terms of level availability* although the DSP integrated Nelson sub-stand is intended to take the bass down to 35Hz or so but it's only a very low-level solution as the main speaker is kept full range (leading their customers slowly by the hand into the twenty first century a step at a time).

The ESR alone can happily play this track if volume isn't silly high and if it's pushed, it simply 'flubs up' rather than 'cracks' if you see what I mean -

Please clarify the term "tinsel" for those of us who aren't familiar with it in the context of speakers.

 

[TonyJZX]

i dont see how there's even that much in components in this thing

like $4,000 in parts in this or even half that.. and further this would have been built to a price in the 1960s by the BBC so they can slap them into TV Licence Vans (I dunno, I'm not British)

these always seemed to be like the "Tannoys" as used in schools and prisons and the like... as long as vocals are ok then its all cool

 

[fpitas]

For those that LIKE the LS3/5a sound, I wonder what a modern speaker would sound like if you put in that dip?

I can sort of answer that. I bring that region (350 - 600Hz) down a little to make some "shouty" tracks sound better. But you can easily go too far and end up screwing up well-recorded tracks.

 

[wgh52]

I've owned a pair of Chartwell LS3/5a from 1980-83. Interestingly, I had them placed ~ 0.3m from the wall, on a side board left and right of the Stereo Tuner/Pre/Power Amp set. This set up sounded quite nice, even my wife liked the small boxes . But these were the times I did not sit down in front of the speakers to listen to music, we listened more "ambient", "on the side" and liked it. When we moved to our new house, where HiFi became more of a real hobby, the LS3/5a quickly lot their charmes on us and "real" speakers, with real bass, resolution and these things, succeeded them. Actually, I don't understand, don't subscribe to and just shake my head over the never ending hype around these, now rip-off priced, speakers!

Greetings,
Winfried

 

[raindance]

I can sort of answer that. I bring that region down a little to make some "shouty" tracks sound better. But you can easily go too far and end up screwing up well-recorded tracks.

But you're talking about the 2-4k BBC dip, not the much lower dip measured in this review which would have zero effect on shoutiness. What Amir measured would probably reduce boxiness and make the speaker sound more like a planar design.

 

[fpitas]

But you're talking about the 2-4k BBC dip, not the much lower dip measured in this review which would have zero effect on shoutiness. What Amir measured would probably reduce boxiness and make the speaker sound more like a planar design.

No, I meant the 350 - 600Hz dip. The post is edited.

 

[raindance]

No, I meant the 350 - 600Hz dip. The post is edited.

First time I've ever heard of shoutiness residing that low down...

 

[fpitas]

First time I've ever heard of shoutiness residing that low down...

That's my word for it. Forwardness, maybe?

 

[Willem]

when this example was made one could buy an actual van for less than the cost of the speaker

That would be a pretty cheap van. I still have the original receipt somewhere, but though not cheap it was by no means crazy audiophool prices. US 1977 retail price/pair $430.

 

[Toni Mas]

That would be a pretty cheap van. I still have the original receipt somewhere, but though not cheap it was by no means crazy audiophool prices. US 1977 retail price/pair $430.

Hifi shops sold them in France as giant Killers for both size and price.

 

[Willem]

current LS3/5s

The Harbeth P3ESR is not even a current version of the LS3/5a, but a different speaker that aims at roughly the same use case of a small speaker in a small listening space.