advertisement


Harbeth P3ESR vs LS3/5A

I would love to read a good review of the Falcons but there has been ZIP info about them since they came out.

Where's Ken Kessler when you need him?
 
Jodet said:
I would love to read a good review of the Falcons but there has been ZIP info about them since they came out.
Click to expand...

I'd not be surprised if there was a review in Stereophile fairly soon - they were one of the speakers used in last months review of a Creek integrated amp.
 
S-Man said:
My auditioning was with them rolled off to a low frequency system at ~100Hz. There is no lack of deep bass or loudness capability when used in this way, however it ruthlessly exposes other failings (or unbalances the sound depending on your POV).
Click to expand...

What exactly does that mean? Did you listen to them as manufactured or not?

A reflex loaded B110 is not exactly what I would call "addressing the bass issues"
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Clearly it isn't going to give you REL type bass extension or power, but it ought to increase bass output/lower the -3dB point or whatever, whilst also freeing up the mid/bass driver of the LS3/etc. to deliver the mid.

But as I said upthread, I've never heard the LS3/5-A with the AB1 so can only report what was proposed when the AB1 was introduced. IIR, Ken Kessler did a rather enthusiastic review in HFN/RR. My copy was last seen heading off to Sheffield in the boot of Dean(SCIDB) s car.

I can however confirm that the general principle works well, as with my Studio3/AB3 setup. Briefly put, the -3dB point of the two box system is around 55 Hz, as opposed to a quote -2dB point at 80Hz for the S3 alone. Sensitivity goes up a tad too.

Power handling increases from 45 watts unclipped, to 50 watts unclipped.

Most importantly, I like them. (And so too do many of my friends). They cost a grand 20 years ago. What would they cost me now?

Mull
 
Tony L said:
FWIW On the few occasions I've heard LS3/5As on the 'bass extenders' I have very much preferred the system with them turned off, or better still removed entirely and replaced with some seriously high-mass stands e.g. Target R series, which actually seem to bring far deeper and better bass than the 'extenders'! The LS3/5A is a little near-field monitor, I'd just set it up for real close late night listening and enjoy it for what it is and what it does best. If I wanted something bigger, fuller and further away with a similar nature I'd use BC1s or ESLs.
Click to expand...

Well Tony, I can only repeat that I haven't heard the LS3 with the AB1 so can't directly comment. See my reply to S-Man above. I just threw in my stuff on the S3/AB3 set up as I thought it might be of interest. ESLs and most bigger/wider boxes are completely out of the question in my room.

I think you could have a point re: stands but maybe for a different reason. Frankly the little spiked MDF base supplied with AB1/AB3 is not up to the job and I had difficulty getting my speakers to stand up really straight and to attention on a thick carpet and slightly uneven solid floor.

Thus, for many years my Rogers have had solid, spiked HNE Granite plinths with a bigger front/back footprint, plus a solid 20mm granite intermediate plate and finally a 20mm granite top plate. This adds useful mass and stability. The whole lot is held together with very thinly rolled lengths of Blu Tak and has stayed put for many years.

Most people are pretty complimentary about my speakers. They seem to produce even better bass performance since I got my LFD amp and go plenty loud enough for a mad half hour, but sound excellent at low levels.

I'm happy.

Mull
 
Mullardman said:
I haven't heard the Harbeth, but for more than 20 years have been very happy with the Rogers Studio 3. This was designed not only as a possible replacement for the LS3 etc. when KEF had a fire and could not guarantee continuity of supply of the B110 drive unit, but also to provide a more 'domestically friendly' but LS3 derived speaker. The designer was Andy Whittle and I'd say he succeeded. The Studio 3 continues to be a fairly well kept secret, but fetches good prices from those 'in the know'. (Martyn Miles lately of this parish was another fan.)
Click to expand...

I've seen a number of variations within the production run of Studio 3s. The earliest appear to have LS3/5A style cabinets with removable baffles, and a polypropylene woofer in a B110-shaped basket. Then at some point the woofer was replaced with one using what appeared to be a SEAS-sourced basket. On these I have seen both rubber and foam surrounds. Then the cabinet design was altered, with rounded front edges. Then the removable baffle was replaced with one that was glued in. Finally, they veneered the front baffle rather than painting it black.

Which are yours?

Image872.jpg


54257.jpg


1346802415825198328.jpg


r111.jpg


76541_big.jpg
 
Mine are a very early possibly ' pre production' pair, numbered 1102 A and B. I believe they are the actual pair used in the original Hi Fi World review when they were partnered with the EAR 834 amp. Around 1993/4 I think. I got the AB3s in May 1996. They ( The S3s ) have matt black painted baffles. The binding posts are not gold but nickel finish and branded ,Mitchell. The internal wiring is IIRC a bit of green sheathed Audio Note AN-D. So all points to a bit of a pre production 'lash up' but very much a quality one. The AB3 are numbered 0003 A/B. Andy told me when I collected them that there was some reason why they couldn't be 001. Made sense at the time but I can't remember what it was. I'll post some pics.
 
kabayiri said:
Last year I tried P3s and M30.1s on a home dem. I'm afraid I preferred the M30.1s though I so wanted it the other way around. The M30.1s needed a bigger room than my music room I think.
Click to expand...

The trick with M30.1s is not forgetting the M. Yes, they are voiced more domestically than the M30, which could be very forward in the mid-range, but they are still basically near field monitors. So they don't need a large room, but in a small room they work best in a near-field monitor set-up, with a classic nearly equilateral triangle, and that is likely to take over the room. So long as you can give them that space, they give you a lot more tonal weight and balance than the P3s. Of course, the little P3s have many virtues, and certainly have greater WAF.
 
I've heard Mullard's Rogers & have to say they sound fantastic. They drive his room & completely disappear.


On the subject of Harbeth, despite me being unimpressed the 1st time I heard them (a pair of Super HL5+. Maybe it was the Amp..), I recently picked up a nearly new pair of M40.1. They certainly do some things well. Missus thinks they sound nice. I'm still on the fence.
 
Elephantears said:
[M30.1s] in a small room [...] work best in a near-field monitor set-up, with a classic nearly equilateral triangle, and that is likely to take over the room. So long as you can give them that space, they give you a lot more tonal weight and balance than the P3s.
Click to expand...

I've found something very similar with the C7s (moving from Spendor SA1s). That extra tonal weight is transformative, for me, in terms of listening pleasure. (I think I have Elephantears's very speakers).
 
strummer said:
On the subject of Harbeth, despite me being unimpressed the 1st time I heard them (a pair of Super HL5+. Maybe it was the Amp..), I recently picked up a nearly new pair of M40.1. They certainly do some things well. Missus thinks they sound nice. I'm still on the fence.
Click to expand...

They must be bloody good indeed, you've kept them for more than a week :D
 
simonom said:
I've found something very similar with the C7s (moving from Spendor SA1s). That extra tonal weight is transformative, for me, in terms of listening pleasure. (I think I have Elephantears's very speakers).
Click to expand...

If you bought them from Gary, then yes. It would be good if you could put a picture up in the system pics thread. It would be nice to see those old friends again and see how they are sitting these days.
 
From Gary they came. Will upload a photo very soon, hopefully tonight.
Re. the question concerning C7s vs. M30.1s, I know only the former.
 
Mullardman said:
Put this particular frog on stands and play with placement. I like them.

Mull
Click to expand...

Yep, those 40.1s are going to be immense. They need an owner who just doesn't take them out of their wrappers and chucks them out to see where they land. :D

SET THEM UP!!;)
 
strummer said:
I've heard Mullard's Rogers & have to say they sound fantastic. They drive his room & completely disappear.


On the subject of Harbeth, despite me being unimpressed the 1st time I heard them (a pair of Super HL5+. Maybe it was the Amp..), I recently picked up a nearly new pair of M40.1. They certainly do some things well. Missus thinks they sound nice. I'm still on the fence.
Click to expand...

ATC100s, now M40.1s ...

I'm not quite sure you are getting this mini monitor thing Ian ;)
 
kennyh said:
Yep, those 40.1s are going to be immense. They need an owner who just doesn't take them out of their wrappers and chucks them out to see where they land. :D

SET THEM UP!!;)
Click to expand...


:D Give me chance!!!! Some of us have to work ya know! :mad:




kabayiri said:
ATC100s, now M40.1s ...

I'm not quite sure you are getting this mini monitor thing Ian ;)
Click to expand...


No, I don't think that's for me. Big is better!



Mullardman said:
In his room, both of the above are mini monitors.

Mull
Click to expand...


I've told you a million times, Do Not Exaggerate! It's not that bloody big.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top