|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.59.200.72
In Reply to: RE: Have not read the review yet... posted by Bill the K on July 16, 2015 at 15:04:51
LOL. Falcon's goal was clearly to replicate the classic BBC original in all respects, not to produce a modern, accurate speaker. The LS3/5A WAS a revolutionary breakthrough product in its day, as Herb makes clear in his historical synopsis, but the art, science, and materials of speaker building HAVE advanced a bit in 40 years, and the current crop of BBC-approved mini-monitors from KEF, Harbeth, Spendor, etc. are technically superior to the original in every measurable parameter.
Bextrene fell out of use as a cone material simply because polypropylene worked better, and only cheap mass-market speakers use Mylar dome tweeters these days. A lot of work went into the original crossovers to at least partly tame the inherent errors of the original drivers. The protruding cabinet edges around the baffle of course raise diffractive hell with the highest frequencies -- look at the upper treble jaggies in JA's measurements, both on and off axis.
Still, there must be something euphonically "right" about the original design -- despite or perhaps because of its response irregularities -- that makes Falcon's reiteration more than just a nostalgia product. The original BBC engineers worked long and hard on the prototype design, until the "magic" fell into place. Herb actually preferred its sound to his new KEF LS50s, and there are probably lots of other listeners out there who will likewise be charmed by its "vintage" sound quality.
Follow Ups:
> The protruding cabinet edges around the baffle of course raise diffractive
> hell with the highest frequencies -- look at the upper treble jaggies in
> JA's measurements, both on and off axis.
The Falcon LS3/5a review will be posted in our website review archive next week.
> Herb actually preferred its sound to his new KEF LS50s...
I preferred the LS50s to my 1978 Rogers LS3/5as, much as I love the latter.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Anyone who thinks the fidelity of the KEF LS50 isn't significantly better than the LS3/5a isn't listening. Preferring the sound and colorations of the LS3/5a to the sound and colorations(less than the LS3/5a but also there, of course)is a completely different statement.
On a second thought I would question how the new speaker can be compared to the original LS3/5a's sound which after 40 years or so can't possibly sound like they originally did.
> I would question how the new speaker can be compared to the original
> LS3/5a's sound which after 40 years or so can't possibly sound like they
> originally did.
A good point. If you look at the comparative response graphs in my review,
you can see that the Falcon has more treble energy overall than my 1978
Rogers.
All I can say is that I start each speaker measurement session with my
1978 LS3/5as and in 25 years I have been doing this they measure the
same. Every couple of years I listen to them for a week or so and they
sound as they always have.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: