SoundArtist ("BBC") LS3/5A Speaker Review

[Galliardist]

The people who actually want an LS3/5A will know to look for the exact name.

That’s what makes the model reviewed here wrong: They could have used a different name, even a slightly different one, and it would not be a problem.

Well, alright, looking at the measurements…

 

[Sokel]

Speaking of how close a replica should be to the original to be called LS3/5A.

As long as the speaker looks like an LS3/5A, it seems it can be sold as such. Even completely different elements than the original, probably a completely different crossover as well. Which of course actually means a completely different speaker than the original LS3/5A, but it is still called LS3 because it apparently sells:
View attachment 329983

WA LS3 PLUS Bookshelf Loudspeaker

Based on our very popular WA-LS3 design, the WA-LS3 PLUS upgrades both treble and mid/bass units to provide a high end bookshelf monitor at a

wilmslowaudio.co.uk

Yep.
If we were to judge from looks,what would we say about that?

Is getting ridiculous sometimes.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Speaking of how close a replica should be to the original to be called LS3/5A.

As long as the speaker looks like an LS3/5A, it seems it can be sold as such. Even completely different elements than the original, probably a completely different crossover as well. Which of course actually means a completely different speaker than the original LS3/5A, but it is still called LS3 because it apparently sells:
View attachment 329983

WA LS3 PLUS Bookshelf Loudspeaker

Based on our very popular WA-LS3 design, the WA-LS3 PLUS upgrades both treble and mid/bass units to provide a high end bookshelf monitor at a

wilmslowaudio.co.uk

Marketers will market I guess.

Thinking about it, the critical thing is that LS3/5A is internal BBC-speak. There were LS3/7 - big (with handles) non A-class monitors. LS5/8 - big A-class monitors; LS5/9 - medium A-class monitors. All "LSx/y" speakers had very tight regulations of specifications and tests for QC. This is the "brand value" that the marketers including SoundArtist are stealing.

 

[DanielT]

Better then to pay homage to its heritage and use a name from a half-century-old model. But that is another matter because the examples below are from the same manufacturer. Also, a brand new speaker, but with the same name: Denton.

Denton 2 Speaker-P Wharfedale Wireless, Idle Bradford, build 1971 ? |Radiomuseum.org

Denton 2 Speaker-P Wharfedale Wireless, Idle Bradford, build 1971 ?, 14 pictures, 1 schematics, Great Britain , tubes, semiconductors, Loudspeaker, headphone

www.radiomuseum.org

Note that there were many different pictures of the Denton 2. I don't know if the picture above is the original speaker.

The new Denton:

Denton 85 – WHARFEDALE

www.wharfedale.co.uk

 

[Mart68]

Better then to pay homage to its heritage and use a name from a half-century-old model. But that is another matter because the examples below are from the same manufacturer. Also, a brand new speaker, but with the same name: Denton.
View attachment 330004

Denton 2 Speaker-P Wharfedale Wireless, Idle Bradford, build 1971 ? |Radiomuseum.org

Denton 2 Speaker-P Wharfedale Wireless, Idle Bradford, build 1971 ?, 14 pictures, 1 schematics, Great Britain , tubes, semiconductors, Loudspeaker, headphone

www.radiomuseum.org

View attachment 330007

Note that there were many different pictures of the Denton 2. I don't know if the picture above is the original speaker.

The new Denton:
View attachment 330011

Denton 85 – WHARFEDALE

www.wharfedale.co.uk

top pic is the Denton 2XP - there were a lot of different Denton models from the 1970s through the 1980s all quite different with different cabs, drivers, crossovers and sound.

probably not the best comparison to pick for that reason.

 

[Galliardist]

Denton is a brand name and no more, it does not demand a particular specification as the LS3/5A does with the licencing.

It's a double edged sword of course. The Denton name is a bit like OMO washing powder or whatever - if you want to be the market leader you have to keep up and use the latest technology, so regular reformulation is needed.

LS3/5A should be exactly as the first LS3/5A, so will have exactly the same problems for normal domestic use as the first one. I think that was the lesson of the previous LS3/5A reviews - this one just piles on confusion through being what it is.

 

[DanielT]

top pic is the Denton 2XP - there were a lot of different Denton models from the 1970s through the 1980s all quite different with different cabs, drivers, crossovers and sound.

probably not the best comparison to pick for that reason.

Then you could perhaps say that Wharfedale took a break of about 40 years and came out with a new model of Denton?

There must now be some thought on Wharfedale's part that they used the Denton model name again? Actually, that's mostly what I think about in relation to
LS3/5A. The fact that the brand name itself sells.

 

[Galliardist]

Then you could perhaps say that Wharfedale took a break of about 40 years and came out with a new model of Denton?

There must now be some thought on Wharfedale's part that they used the Denton model name again? Actually, that's mostly what I think about in relation to
LS3/5A. The fact that the brand name itself sells.

There's a retro trend. Wharfedale is an IAG brand these days and they are trying to capitalise on it, to the extent of bringing back the Leak brand name for the matching electronics to these Dentons.

At least Whafedale has been a continuous brand through the entire time. The last original Leak rolled off the production line in the early 1980s, and the new stuff has no relationship to the originals, except for the brand and amplifier model name and look - and they got that wrong, given that the original bearer of the model name was a stinker, and a copy of someone else's work into the bargain!

EDIT - Oh. The new Leak product is called the "Stereo 130" and the bad one, though the look is the basis for the new, was the "Stereo 30".

 

[DanielT]

There's a retro trend. Wharfedale is an IAG brand these days and they are trying to capitalise on it, to the extent of bringing back the Leak brand name for the matching electronics to these Dentons.

At least Whafedale has been a continuous brand through the entire time. The last original Leak rolled off the production line in the early 1980s, and the new stuff has no relationship to the originals, except for the brand and amplifier model name and look - and they got that wrong, given that the original bearer of the model name was a stinker, and a copy of someone else's work into the bargain!

Yes, it's a smart thing to do. The demand is obviously there.

Why Retro-Inspired Hi-Fi Components Are Getting So Hot Right Now

More companies are using the aesthetic of the 70s to design and build modern stereo equipment, from receivers to turntables and speakers, and that's good for people who like music because you get great sound, flexibility, and classic style.

www.lifewire.com

 

[Mart68]

There's a retro trend. Wharfedale is an IAG brand these days and they are trying to capitalise on it, to the extent of bringing back the Leak brand name for the matching electronics to these Dentons.

At least Whafedale has been a continuous brand through the entire time. The last original Leak rolled off the production line in the early 1980s, and the new stuff has no relationship to the originals, except for the brand and amplifier model name and look - and they got that wrong, given that the original bearer of the model name was a stinker, and a copy of someone else's work into the bargain!

EDIT - Oh. The new Leak product is called the "Stereo 130" and the bad one, though the look is the basis for the new, was the "Stereo 30".

I have owned some of the 'original' Leak equipment - the Stereo 30 Plus and the TL10 valve monoblock (with the mono pre-amp which I still have I think).

Also the 'Delta 30' tuner, still got that somewhere, probably under the bed.

Also owned the '2000' receiver although that was made after the Leak brand was sold to Rank - so IAG are actually the third owner of the brand. The Rank era is considered the worst, the company's original reputation came from its valve amplifiers - TL10, TL12. TL12.1 monblocs and the Stereo 20.

The monoblocs now fetch thousands, I sold mine for £120 in about 1992. Doh.

 

[Robbo99999]

Yep.
If we were to judge from looks,what would we say about that?
View attachment 329998

Is getting ridiculous sometimes.

How do those perform though? I'd be very curious to know how they would perform side by side with the originals.

 

[Sokel]

How do those perform though? I'd be very curious to know how they would perform side by side with the originals.

Judging by the reviews of the (tenths) of the similar fake raw drivers there I wouldn't be curious if I were you.
Falling from the 60th floor odds are no good to make it alive.

 

[Robbo99999]

Judging by the reviews of the (tenths) of the similar fake raw drivers there I wouldn't be curious if I were you.
Falling from the 60th floor odds are no good to make it alive.

Clones are interesting if they perform well, albeit it's ethically a bit more dubious to support outright copies.

 

[Sokel]

Clones are interesting if they perform well, albeit it's ethically a bit more dubious to support outright copies.

I would say better compare them to each other and I have a funny story about it.
Some time ago my friend was all about separate AMT tweeters,the ones that comes with their small (or not so small) enclosure.

He must had bought more than 10 pairs of various ones and kept testing them.

He then somehow discovered some fake Mundorf-AMT164 which are consider to be nice for something like 200-300 euro the pair instead of the about 1.5-2k euro normal street price.

Let's forget anything else,tonalities and stuff,they had about 3-4db difference in level output compared to each other

It was funny actually,I still remember the particular "I knew it" expression he had while we were laughing with the rest of the friends there.

 

[Ricardojoa]

Not bad for a fraction of the cost. Just need a bit help at cross over. Keep in mind these were never meant to be accurate speakers.

 

[Galliardist]

Not bad for a fraction of the cost. Just need a bit help at cross over. Keep in mind these were never meant to be accurate speakers.

But they were, and maybe are, meant to be accurately matched speakers to every other LS3/5A, to bear the name.

I don't see how you can say that these meet the criteria, quite apart from the licensing.

The other versions are more expensive, at least in part, because the makers have to meet a basic standard that requires manufacturing drivers and crossovers to specification.

 

[m8o]

No, you're thinking of these

View attachment 329303
...

You may be right.

 

[amirm]

Listening tests and equalization added to the review.

 

[GXAlan]

Listening tests and equalization added to the review.

Wow, that it did something to your Mark Levinson amp!

Mark Levinson No.33H monoblock power amplifier Measurements part 2

At a higher 50W level into 8 ohms, the residual distortion (fig.4) was primarily third-harmonic; though at 0.0045%, this is probably of academic interest only. Lowering the load impedance to 2 ohms and keeping the output voltage constant, resulting in 200W dissipation in the load, brought up the...

www.stereophile.com

It seems like it was really stable at even high power into 2 ohms so 1.7 ohms shouldn't be that bad? Given the relatively low power handling of these LS3/5A (official or not), that's weird. Did the amp go into an actual "protect mode" or could there be something else?

Is there a way to do a measurement of this particular speaker with the Aiyama versus the ML? Would be interesting to see if the sweep changes when switching the amps.

 

[mhardy6647]

Listening tests and equalization added to the review.

oooh, oooh, oooh! I gotta go look!