advertisement


Graham Audio LS5/9

My comment was limited to the differences in the curves *as presented*. Whether these are due to room effects, voicing, etc. is a separate discussion. The 3 dB between the two, call it a peak, hump, convex feature, whatever, it’s there and will be audible. The LS6 is flatter in the region under discussion, again, my comment was limited in scope to the 2.5-7 k region.

Note that I am not judging the audible or technical merits of either speaker based on these curves, only commenting on what looked like interesting differences.

Whatever.

That is not correct.


hoNwqYc.png
 
Whatever.

Is there a point to this?


To be clear, the sound power is the *total power* radiated over an angle of 4 pi steradians. This will be frequency dependent, indicative of the directivity of the radiator. It is far from: “Power response is 360º frequency response”.

May I recommend you get and read Toole’s book on Sound Reproduction. Depending on technical level, you might find Beranak and Mellow’s book on Sound Fields and Transducers to be very useful too.
 
Having owned a pair of LS 5/9s for a few years now I thought I would chime in. These aren’t speakers for people into heavy rock but if you like jazz, vocal and some classical music they are well worth considering.

Mine are paired with a Lavardin IT which is only just powerful enough. Ideally I would go for a slightly more powerful amp.

Sitting in the sweet spot these are some of the most enjoyable speakers at the price point. Especially in the mid range. I preferred them marginally over the Harbeth 30.2, however they do have a lot of similarities.

I have mine on open metal stands that were copied from the Graham site. I would love to hear the 5/8s one day.
 
To be clear, the sound power is the *total power* radiated over an angle of 4 pi steradians. This will be frequency dependent, indicative of the directivity of the radiator. It is far from: “Power response is 360º frequency response”.

Total power radiated by a lodspeaker is 360° frequency response.

May I recommend you get and read Toole’s book on Sound Reproduction. Depending on technical level, you might find Beranak and Mellow’s book on Sound Fields and Transducers to be very useful too.

I have read Toole's book (and found it somewhat overrated), but not Beranak and Mellow’s, will look it up.
 
Total power radiated by a lodspeaker is 360° frequency response.

Still incorrect. If you would only stop arguing unnecessarily you might actually learn something.

I have read Toole's book (and found it somewhat overrated), but not Beranak and Mellow’s, will look it up.

Based on your responses I doubt you are in a position to comment on Toole. Good luck with Beranak and Mellow.
 
I believe tuga argued with me unnecessarily over at the other forum as well. I guess he's a bit of a devil's advocate meant to antagonise people. He isn't playing the devil's advocate role well, but he sure is good at antagonising
 
Why not learn for yourself? Best to read a book on the subject, not advertising copy.

Also see my earlier post.

I am asking for Your definition. How do You define frequency response and sound power response?
I want to understand why you believe that my definitions are incorrect.
To me they seem identical to Toole's:

7rdfj9A.png


HNZwiXF.png
 
Sitting in the sweet spot these are some of the most enjoyable speakers at the price point. Especially in the mid range. I preferred them marginally over the Harbeth 30.2, however they do have a lot of similarities.
.

That sums up my experience. I note one member described these Harbeths and Grahams as completely different, but to me they are quite similar, with many of the same strengths, subtly varied as to the mix of ingredients. Perhaps the Harbeths are somewhat smoother, the Grahams a bit more raw or unfiltered, with a tad more bass. Both have superb vocals, and midrange generally.
 
.

That sums up my experience. I note one member described these Harbeths and Grahams as completely different, but to me they are quite similar, with many of the same strengths, subtly varied as to the mix of ingredients. Perhaps the Harbeths are somewhat smoother, the Grahams a bit more raw or unfiltered, with a tad more bass. Both have superb vocals, and midrange generally.
In my room I thought the Grahams were slightly more neutral and dynamic but not a lot in it.

My Lavardin IT is a good match but having heard the LFD NCSE MK3 paired with the Graham LS 5/9s (in my room) it was able to extract a bit more bottom end out of the speakers.

I also thought the Grahams were a bit easier to drive than the Harbeths.
 
I am asking for Your definition. How do You define frequency response and sound power response?
I want to understand why you believe that my definitions are incorrect.
To me they seem identical to Toole's:

SNIP

FR is the sound *intensity* level as a function of frequency at a given *point* in space.

I’ve already defined power response in an earlier post.

Edit: This discussion has strayed a long way from the original topic. Perhaps it’s time for a separate thread?
 
Last edited:
Were you aiming the speakers towards the listening spot as intended?
The LS5/9s are flat on-axis up to 19kHz.

graham-audio-ls-5-9-fr1.jpg


O52XeI3.png


But they probably relax a bit more in the presence region off-axis than the SHL5+s, as do the M30s.
Would you please provide a link to these charts. I'm having difficulty reading the numbers (probably need new glasses).
 
I am going through a bit of transitional phase right now, coming from active ATC 100s and currently listening to Harbeth P3ES at the end of an Accuphase class A amp. I like both for different reasons. The Accuphase however stays.

I hear a lot of good things about the Graham Audio LS5/9, seems like a speaker to get off the merry-go-round, instead of chasing the latest carbon fiber/diamond/ceramic/CNC-milled-from-solid-aluminium flavour-of-the-month tech trend in speaker design. They have been around for decades, and will likely be around for a couple more.

Unfortunately there are no distributers and consequently no shops in CH that have them, so I would probably have to buy them without trying them first. I could sell them on if they turn out to be incompatible with my ears, room (23m2) and/or electronics, but at a loss (which wouldn't kill me financially, but still).

Any opinions, experiences & comments?
Have you considered the new LS8/1 an 8 inch driver and apparently better treble with the 2 HF drivers...
 
Have you considered the new LS8/1 an 8 inch driver and apparently better treble with the 2 HF drivers...

When I saw a pic of the 8/1 I wondered if it was going to be a reworked Studio 1 but would I be correct in saying it’s more an updated BC1?
Not wishing to divert the thread but I’ve always been curious about the 5/8. I saw a Rogers pair must have been in the early 80’s but never heard them, they certainly didn’t appear to be popular I guess due to the external crossover / power amps. Even in passive form as the Chartwell pm450 they are pretty rare!
I wonder how popular a seller it is in its Graham Audio incarnation, I think it looks great but dimensionally I guess it looks it’s age (wide/shallow as opposed to the modern narrow/deep trend) not sure about the crossover wires on the baffle either!
Anyone had any experience of them?
 


advertisement


Back
Top