Rogers LS3/5a (BBC) Speaker Review

[DSJR]

Apologies for the thread drift, but I wonder why you say this, as there's nothing in the 303's specification or measurements that would account for it provided it's used within its specification. That means a minimum load of 4 ohms. If using loudspeakers where the impedance drops below that, then the amp is being used outside its design specification.

S.

Drifting even more off topic, but the content below does kind-of show what was used in UK broadcast editing suites with later BBC-style monitors.

I have a motley collection of old Crown prosumer power amps which broadly all 'sound the same' to me as indeed they should (taut and lean in audiophool language, although they do change 'sound' to a degree with the programme material played so pretty transparent still I think). The HH VX300 is a touch different in a slight way as it has extensive filtering below 20Hz apparently and the hf over 20kHz also appears tightly rolled off. What comes out is an amplified only version of what goes in and with the speakers I currently use, perfect for the job!

My rebuilt Quad II's and working 303 also 'sound the same' as each other, confirming Quad's rather sniffy claim forty odd years ago that all 'their' amps sounded the same, but the sonic 'flavour' into my speakers is softer, warmer, 'nicer' and absolutely charming into my Spendors and Harbeths at the modest volumes I play at. I also have a 'virgin' 303 which blew up a few years ago and it was donated to me to see what I could do with it. It's in too good a condition for my clumsy mitts to want to try to repair (I did replace an output transistor like for like but the fault is deeper and maybe on the supply board for which I have a replacement). I'm not geared up for soldering any more and have lost any remaining confidence in my skills anyway in recent times, so have left it, although there's a gent on eBay UK supplying nicely made replacement boards as per original design, who will service and repair it for not too much - I intend to send it to him for repair at some point.

Kind-of coming back on topic, the LS5/9's I had for a goodly while came out of an editing suite, their intentionally scooped out upper mids working well in a nearfield situation for the editing staff I gather. These are incredibly strange speakers as I've NEVER heard a speaker change its sonic 'perspectives' in different rooms the way these LS5/9's did, going from a stark balance with deep perceived sound-field to a heavy dull balance with crashing top (I hesitate to say 'tinsel' again) but a perfect reason to want honest 'neutral balance' speakers/monitors today. The VX300 was the amp driving them for years and you can see the life this old warhorse has had, decals rubbed off the now unobtainable front panel, slightly iffy Noble attenuators around the half way point and heat marks on the main circuit board from I suspect 24/7 use for years in its rack - I fixed an open circuit bias resistor and offsets are around 5mV each side as recommended in the service info I have and it gets fairly warm/hot on both heatsinks now - I still fetch it out to use from time to time, but the old D-150 does seem to tell me more about the music I play (yes, a subjective emotional vibe, but there ya go!). A sister suite at the same facility used the same type speakers and a Quad 520 power amp which I lusted after having seen it

 

[SMJ]

My Mitsi Evo X takes about 30 seconds to refuel for another 280 miles, the Kia EV6 takes significantly longer - that's progress I guess. The Kia would be absolutely useless in trying to get from the south of the UK to Shetland in a one hop journey.

By 2005 the BBC was installing Dynaudio Air series loudspeakers as the default in most areas and BM5s in non critical areas as new DHD, Studer Vista & Studer OnAir 3000 desks were being installed - that is until Dynaudio discontinued the Air series around 2016. Auto power-save when faders on the desk were shut or editing very quiet orchestra passages was a problem. Being a mere operator meant I didn't officially have access to the setup software in all the studios I worked in and the speakers were often installed by contractors who sometimes forgot to update the firmware before official commissioning and handover.

Later installations were primarily Genelec, again due to ease of service & replacement when faulty.

 

[AudioSceptic]

Theory: The second row in the "stars" table is Value (for the money).
Practice: Value for Falcon LS3/5a is 4 stars (should be 1 star). In the first row (Sound) full 5 stars for the same speaker is very questionable, to say the least (should be 1 star).

I suppose it's not just about SQ vs price. It's more about "what is the best tiny speaker?" because you can do so much more for your money if a bigger speaker is allowed into the comparison.

 

[AudioSceptic]

I suspect that I would like these (I still have my BCIs, bought in 1976), but how do they do with stuff like the Alabama 3 <

>? As for the LS3/5a, isn't the issue the current price/value rather than the SQ in absolute terms?

There's a pair of s3/5r2 on UK ebay for sensible money. Must say I'm tempted.

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

I suppose it's not just about SQ vs price.

It is Sound quality vs price.

It's more about "what is the best tiny speaker?" because you can do so much more for your money if a bigger speaker is allowed into the comparison.

No, the fifth row is titled Overall - that is "what is the best...".
Of course you can get much better speaker for 2475 English pounds, but that is another story...

 

[Short38]

With apologies to members who are Vegans/LactoOvo vegans, one more audio sacred cow pretty well prepped for cooking.

 

[AudioSceptic]

It is Sound quality vs price.


No, the fifth row is titled Overall - that is "what is the best...".
Of course you can get much better speaker for 2475 English pounds, but that is another story...

Indeed, so it's SQ vs price but only for tiny speakers.

 

[NoMoFoNo]

That’s an audio antique collector‘s price that only the 15 ohm version can achieve, simply because far fewer of them were made than of the 11 ohm version and folks in Asia go crazy over them. A pair of modern LS3/5a, BBC certified and from an accredited maker, can be had for 1800 Euros.

With the choices available in 2023 I wouldn't pay $350 for these. I cannot believe that posters defend these in any performance-based sense in 2023.

Further, I'm not particularly impressed by what the BBC was up to back then. I suppose other European broadcasters, not to mention the Americans, were using what, soup cans and string to check for audio quality on broadcasts? If anything, I'd want to know what the American broadcasters, the ones who had to compete against each other, were doing with technology. The emotionality that hangs in the air over 'British audio' is so strange considering actual performance.

 

[anmpr1]

1) With the choices available in 2023 I wouldn't pay $350 for these.

2) Further, I'm not particularly impressed by what the BBC was up to back then.

1) Yeah, but if you were searching for a loudspeaker the size of a shoe box in 1975, and had what they cost back then for your budget, what would you have been looking at?

2) You mean you weren't impressed by Benny Hill?

 

[Jimmyblues1959]

This is a review, listening tests and detailed measurements of a vintage Rogers L3/5a monitor implementation licensed from BBC with the same name. It is on kind load from a member. New, it costs US $4895 a pair.
View attachment 328359
From the outside, there is nothing to distinguish this speaker from cheap bookshelves sold when it was manufactured. Back panel reveals no secrets either:
View attachment 328360

Owner kindly gave permission to leave the serial number on the picture for those of you who want to trace its lineage. Owner says it was manufactured between 1980 and 1987.

Searching for measurements, there are a few but are either old and crude, or have issues (e.g. stereophile measurements with incorrect bass response). So this test may be the first true measurement of this speaker.

Rogers LS3/5a Speaker Measurement
The grill can be removed but it wasn't easy to pull off so I tested with it on. From some reading I have done, speaker was designed with it being on to get rid of edge diffraction and such. Let's see the anechoic measurement:
View attachment 328361
Well, that is no good. Bass response is clearly wrong. It is uneven and low in level. We also have a pronounced resonance which one manufacturers of these clones claimed was due to age. I have seen the same in just about every measurement of this speaker so that doesn't sound right. It seems like "bog standard" woofer resonance due to it being used outside of its linear range:

View attachment 328362

Early window and predicted in-room response predictably don't look nice:

View attachment 328363

View attachment 328364

Owner didn't want me to stress the speaker and asked for distortion at 76 and 86 instead of my normal 86/96 dBSPL @ 1 meter:
View attachment 328365
View attachment 328366

The peak in distortion around 1.5 KHz is another reason to have crossed over the woofer earlier although it is unknown if the tweeter could handle that better.

Directivity is quite rough in horizontal axis:
View attachment 328367

View attachment 328368

Vertically you better point the tweeter at your ear:
View attachment 328369

Waterfall shows clear resonance:
View attachment 328370

Step response shows an odd discontinuity in the woofer response which may be due to that resonance:
View attachment 328371

Edit: forgot the impedance plot:

View attachment 328375
Rogers LS3/5a Speaker Listening Test and EQ
Due to low bass output, overall sensitivity is quite low requiring cranking up the amplifier volume. Once there, my first female track didn't sound awful but was rather bright and somewhat rough. Filling in the bass hole completed the tonal range for vocals proving efficacy of our measurement. I then corrected a few other issues and fine tuned to get this:
View attachment 328372
Not only was the speaker much more balanced sounding, it also had more clarity. Those resonances were sure hiding detail and ambiance in the music. That last notch filter at 5 kHz was barely audible but the rest were much needed.

Once there, I was impressed with the volume this little speaker could produce and the large halo of sound it created in may admittedly very large space. I could imagine listening to two of them would have been more satisfying.

Conclusions
Much of what I read from companies who have cloned the BBC LS3/5a is around replicating components. Measurements seem to be an afterthought. That is the wrong way to do this as I could care less what components are used. If you want to replicate the old speaker, replicate its audible frequency response. That, is what we listen to, not what the parts do.

Now, it is possible the old BBC had the problems we see here in which case, why reproduce a faulty product and charge so much for it? It makes no sense to me. Get a proper speaker if your goal is enjoyment of music. The history is not going to pay the bills there.

I can't recommend the Rogers LS3/5a speaker/monitor. If you have it, a bit of filtering does it a lot of good, bringing the sound into hi-fi category.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

I bought a brand new pair of teak 15 ohm Rogers LS3/5a's back in 1986. I paid $550 plus NYS sales tax. I really enjoyed the speakers because of their imaging. However, in order to obtain this imaging I'd have to turn the speakers inward so that their axis crossed directly in front of my listening area. If I moved slightly to the right or left the imaging was compromised.

As for the price of these new LS3/5a's I understand that labor costs have increased significantly since 1986, and that inflation must be taken into consideration. Even so, nearly $5000 (almost 10x the price I paid) seems extreme.

Wishing everyone a Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[Somafunk]

Further, I'm not particularly impressed by what the BBC was up to back then.

Perhaps that's a lack on insight, do some research on Delia Derbyshire and The BBC Radiophonic workshop to start with and you may be surprised

 

[Westsounds]

They are nice sounding speakers around the vocals, but these speakers are a complete rip-off at that price! £300 would be more realistic, how they continue to sell at this price amazes me.

 

[sergeauckland]

One further thought about the use of LS3/5As is that of ubiquity. They were everywhere in the BBC and in many of the commercial stations, in offices as well as voice booths and OB vans. That meant that at least one part of the Circle of Confusion was eliminated i.e. going from room to room, at least the loudspeakers stayed the same, good or ill. It was the same for headphones, the Beyer DT100 was standard in every station I ever went to. Not because they were particularly good headphones, but because everyone was used to them, and what they did, they did 'well enough'. Professionally, standardisation is sometime more important than absolute performance.

S.

 

[holdingpants01]

Perhaps that's a lack on insight, do some research on Delia Derbyshire and The BBC Radiophonic workshop to start with and you may be surprised

tbh she left BBC 2 years before even the production of LS3/5A started

 

[Waxx]

With the choices available in 2023 I wouldn't pay $350 for these. I cannot believe that posters defend these in any performance-based sense in 2023.

Further, I'm not particularly impressed by what the BBC was up to back then. I suppose other European broadcasters, not to mention the Americans, were using what, soup cans and string to check for audio quality on broadcasts? If anything, I'd want to know what the American broadcasters, the ones who had to compete against each other, were doing with technology. The emotionality that hangs in the air over 'British audio' is so strange considering actual performance.

For real studio work they used other speakers, the LS5/8 and the LS5/9, that were used with custom amps called the AM8/16 with active fixed crossovers tuned for the speakers. and amp boards based on the Quad 405. The LS5/8 and LS5/9 were build with Chartwell 12" woofers, and Audax H17-12.9-D25 dome tweeters, and were competitive with the monitors of that time.

Belgian (where i live) and German broadcasting companies at that time used Klein & Hummel speakers, that are the direct ancestors of the Neumann monitors of today. I bought some old K&H speakers from the 1970's from the Belgian broadcasting company (VRT & RTBF) arround the turn of the century in a public auction sale that were broken (minor issues with broken connections). I repaired those and sold again for profit like i did a lot at that time with hifi and studio stuff. At that time not many were interested it seems because i could get them for a ridiculous low price.

 

[Westsounds]

It’s hard to rate this speaker at the top of the thread here, as they do actually sound pretty good in use. The design I believe is limited but was still a bit of a sweet spot for sealed speakers, and they do reproduce vocals very nicely, and perhaps one of the standards which many other speakers often fail to achieve so convincingly. But then they are often used on high-end electronics with well recorded material and a healthy dose of euphoric distortion thrown in, most people would fall in love with that, subjectively. But many modern speakers under £300 could do as well in those circumstances. These are also a decent Hi-Fi speaker for very tight spaces yet add a sub, and they can play to a larger area.

As Serge said earlier they are good enough Hi-Fi speakers, and perhaps some even, so as a result could be rated fine or even great based on their vocal reproduction and what can be squeezed out of such a small box. They do have some of the best midrange I’ve heard of any speaker, regardless of cost. The trouble is, they are daylight robbery! And for that I would have to give them a poor or less if I could.

 

[Draki]

A modern-day take on the LS3/5a :
*two for the price of one (inc. amps)!

Ashdown NFP-1

British bass‑amp brand Ashdown’s debut monitor is inspired by the classic BBC LS3/5a. How does it compare with the real deal?

www.soundonsound.com

 

[AudioSceptic]

For real studio work they used other speakers, the LS5/8 and the LS5/9, that were used with custom amps called the AM8/16 with active fixed crossovers tuned for the speakers. and amp boards based on the Quad 405. The LS5/8 and LS5/9 were build with Chartwell 12" woofers, and Audax H17-12.9-D25 dome tweeters, and were competitive with the monitors of that time.

Belgian (where i live) and German broadcasting companies at that time used Klein & Hummel speakers, that are the direct ancestors of the Neumann monitors of today. I bought some old K&H speakers from the 1970's from the Belgian broadcasting company (VRT & RTBF) arround the turn of the century in a public auction sale that were broken (minor issues with broken connections). I repaired those and sold again for profit like i did a lot at that time with hifi and studio stuff. At that time not many were interested it seems because i could get them for a ridiculous low price.

I've always assumed that the "KH" in the Neumann speaker names stood for Klein & Hummel. According to Wikipedia, Sennheiser took over Neumann and then K & H. Is that correct, as I find it odd that they would carry on using the Neumann brand but not K &H (except for KH in the speaker names)?

 

[LTig]

I've always assumed that the "KH" in the Neumann speaker names stood for Klein & Hummel. According to Wikipedia, Sennheiser took over Neumann and then K & H. Is that correct, as I find it odd that they would carry on using the Neumann brand but not K &H (except for KH in the speaker names)?

This is correct.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

I've always assumed that the "KH" in the Neumann speaker names stood for Klein & Hummel. According to Wikipedia, Sennheiser took over Neumann and then K & H. Is that correct, as I find it odd that they would carry on using the Neumann brand but not K &H (except for KH in the speaker names)?

If I would have to venture a guess: Neumann is globally (among professionals) a very well recognized brand for its mics.