advertisement


The BBC LS3/6

Martyn Miles said:
Slightly off topic, but I thinking about trying a pair of Rogers Studio 7s.
I’ve always admired Rogers interpretation of the ‘2 cubic foot BBC cabinet’ approach.
Click to expand...

I got a pair of Studio 7s and very good they are, too.
If you want my thoughts on them, look under ‘rogers export monitors’ on this Classic section.
 
The family tree has a new member:

Spendor BC1(bextrene cone)

BBC LS3/6 & Rogers Export Monitor (bextrene cone)

Spendor SP1 & Rogers Studio 1(bextrene cone)

Spendor SP1/2 (polypropylene cone)

Spendor SP1/2e (polypropylene cone)

Stirling LS3/6 (polypropylene cone)

Graham Audio LS8/1 (polypropylene cone) - so called, as far as I know, because Spendor would not license the BC1 name
 
Interesting. I suspect there will be as many differences between the different modern brands in the low tweeter as in the bass unit. I’m sure a lot of the Spendor BC1/Rogers Export Monitor magic lies in that Celestion unit. Nice to see proper plywood thin-wall construction with a screwed baffle and back-door.

PS I guess really the Harbeth SHL5 should be on your list even if it does use metal tweeters and MDF cabs. It is still hugely BBC/Spendor/Rogers influenced.
 
Tony L said:
Interesting. I suspect there will be as many differences between the different modern brands in the low tweeter as in the bass unit. I’m sure a lot of the Spendor BC1/Rogers Export Monitor magic lies in that Celestion unit. Nice to see proper plywood thin-wall construction with a screwed baffle and back-door.

PS I guess really the Harbeth SHL5 should be on your list even if it does use metal tweeters and MDF cabs. It is still hugely BBC/Spendor/Rogers influenced.
Click to expand...

Does the Harbeth SHL5 have a relatively nice smooth laid back sound?

S.
 
tuga said:
The family tree has a new member:

Spendor BC1(bextrene cone)

BBC LS3/6 & Rogers Export Monitor (bextrene cone)

Spendor SP1 & Rogers Studio 1(bextrene cone)

Spendor SP1/2 (polypropylene cone)

Spendor SP1/2e (polypropylene cone)

Stirling LS3/6 (polypropylene cone)

Graham Audio LS8/1 (polypropylene cone) - so called, as far as I know, because Spendor would not license the BC1 name
Click to expand...

You forgot the BCII (prob the most similar to LS3/6), and the SP1 has polypropylene cone.
 
If I remember correctly, I used a A60 for a while with my BC1s about ‘77/‘78.
I then bought a Meridian 100 series amplifier.
 
Tony L said:
I guess really the Harbeth SHL5 should be on your list even if it does use metal tweeters and MDF cabs. It is still hugely BBC/Spendor/Rogers influenced.
Click to expand...

I had them in the earlier post but removed them for that very same reason: the MDF cabinet is not built to BBC spec.
 
Spendor BC1/BC2 (bextrene cone)

BBC LS3/6 & Rogers Export Monitor (bextrene cone)

Rogers Studio 1(bextrene cone)

Spendor SP1(polypropylene cone)

Spendor SP1/2 (polypropylene cone)

Spendor SP1/2e (polypropylene cone)

Stirling LS3/6 (polypropylene cone)

Graham Audio LS8/1 (polypropylene cone)
 
Interesting interview with Derek Hughes about redesigning the "classics" with better drivers:

 
Tony L said:
I have two. One I rebuilt myself using modern Dada Electronics boards, i.e. very nice glass-fibre boards, all populated with modern audiophile components etc. The other one is a simply amazing condition late-60s original that has had its electrolytic capacitors and trim-pots replaced and has rather larger coupling and PSU caps, but is otherwise totally stock, i.e. has its original carbon resistors, driver board transistors. Both have the correct output transistors etc. The latter (mainly stock) one sounds quite noticeably better to my ears, and that is the one that met the lovely Radford. I don’t understand why, but that particular 303 is a bloody good sounding amp!
Click to expand...
Sorry if I don't answer to the BC1 and its relatives, the more so as this is a very eloquent thread. but I would like to say that I believe that these carbon film resistors could contribute a significant part to the good sound sensation of your Quad 303. I have two Quad 34 pre amps, one already with orange logo but even lighter grey already with board number 7 and a very later one with dark grey housing. The light grey older one has the original brown carbon film resistors. The dark grey newer one has a lot of original built in blue resistors. I suspect that they might be metal film resistors due to their colour? At least it sounds much less open and natural but sharper and after a while annoying and not so organic.
 
Tony L said:
Interesting. I suspect there will be as many differences between the different modern brands in the low tweeter as in the bass unit. I’m sure a lot of the Spendor BC1/Rogers Export Monitor magic lies in that Celestion unit. Nice to see proper plywood thin-wall construction with a screwed baffle and back-door.

PS I guess really the Harbeth SHL5 should be on your list even if it does use metal tweeters and MDF cabs. It is still hugely BBC/Spendor/Rogers influenced.
Click to expand...
I am listening to an SB LS3/6 since 2016 and I am very happy with the sound. So the following is just fantasy. Although these Stirling Broadcast are really fantastic for my ears (after years of Mcintosh C22 CE with MC275 Mk4 I like to listen to them with Quad 34/306 since this spring) I will never forget the first time I heard a BC1 in a hi-fi shop in 1981. This magic, often quoted here, exists. (I'm sure you know this kind of experience, for me as a teenager it was the first big Tannoy, the first Klipschorn and then a little later this first BC1 that were so formative) So how about someone taking an SB LS3/6 using a Celestion midrange driver and adjusting the crossover accordingly? I would be very curious to hear how that would sound. The good from the old and the new times.
 
tuga said:
I agree, which is why I wrote that they're "a much closer relative to the LS3/6(BC1)" than the HL1 both in terms of topology as well as performance.

They use MDF (probably to keep the cost down, as with the tweeters) but retain the "lossy" screwed thin panels screwed onto hardwood battens construction.

Stereophile writes that the Stirling also uses MDF in the front and back panels.

As for the sound, in my perspective modern drivers are capable of reproducing the signal with more accuracy / less distortion. Since both the original (BC1) as well as the current models (SHL5+, SB LS3/6) are identically flat in that region what you refer to as "BBC’s midrange magic" is probably down to "colouration".

In my opinion the midrange of both the SHL5+ and the SB LS3/6 is quite similar. The SHL5+ has a slight edge in the sub-bass probably due to the lower frequency and overdamped tuning of the port and the SB LS3/6 has a slight edge in the treble. I bought the latter.
Click to expand...
I also read in Stereophile years ago that the SB LS3/6 would need MDF. I have never read it anywhere else. Does anyone know more about this? I have the SB LS3/6 and they don't "sound" like MDF. But what do I know. If I don't get an answer, I'll just unscrew the back panel and see for myself if it's MDF or birchply.
 
HeinzR said:
I also read in Stereophile years ago that the SB LS3/6 would need MDF. I have never read it anywhere else. Does anyone know more about this? I have the SB LS3/6 and they don't "sound" like MDF. But what do I know. If I don't get an answer, I'll just unscrew the back panel and see for myself if it's MDF or birchply.
Click to expand...

According to the manufacturer the LS3/6 is made of plywood. Mark Hennessy's review of the SB-88 seems to confirm that.
I am not getting the grills off for fear of damaging the veneer.
 
I'm not convinced that the Rogers Studio 1 are ply (I have a pair here). I think I read something on the Hennessey site that suggested that they're mdf, though follow the thin wall approach etc.
Here it is, bottom of the page: https://www.markhennessy.co.uk/rogers/ls36.htm

Either way they sound absolutely glorious! Mine are paired with Quad Elite pre/power, pretty much replicating the setup I had ~5 years previously of Studio 1's + Quad 99/909 (before I wandered off after Tannoys again).

There's a late pair of Export Monitors on ebay right now, finishing today (a bit tatty but cheap).
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
tuga said:
According to the manufacturer the LS3/6 is made of plywood. Mark Hennessy's review of the SB-88 seems to confirm that.
I am not getting the grills off for fear of damaging the veneer.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for your kind reply. I have never removed the grill and would not do so. You wouldn't see any MDF without removing a driver (which is not recommended as the lock nuts could fall down inside?) because according to all the photos, the baffle is also veneered. I wasn't very serious about the unconditional urge to open it :). But if so it would may be be more productive to unscrew the rear panel (and of course remember the tightening torque of the screws beforehand). Then you would immediately see in the holes of the speaker connections whether it is birch plywood. Or I could write Doug an email and ask him. Anyway, is it so important? All testers are highly satisfied with the LS3/6, while on some Harbeth models the MDF seems to interfere acoustically, at least what you can read, I haven't heard any Harbeth models yet.

However, it is amazing what reviewers write when they don't have good background knowledge. Instead of keeping quiet, they sometimes write nonsense (I think so at least, or they know better). Below is a quote from a German review of the SB 88 about the gluing vs. screwing as the BBC principle (and the SB LS 3/6):

"Here there is a break with tradition to report. Normally, either the front or the back was screwed so that the speakers could be repaired quickly and easily in case of service. For home use, as with the SB-88, gluing is sufficient. Also, the SB-88's bass-midrange driver is not screwed in from the back like the LS 3/6 and earlier classic monitors. The sacrifice of ease of maintenance, however, has no other effect on the acoustic properties except for the lower production costs."

If this reviewer writes that the bolted front and/or back boards were only there for service reasons, then I wonder what the "broken bell" theory is all about. With my SB LS 3/6 I can hear very clear nuances in the sound balance, depending on whether the rear panel is screwed on too tightly or not. But Mark Hennessy also writes that there is not too much difference in sound between the SB 88 and the SB LS 3/6. Anyway, I'm glad that my LS 3/6 is screwed on. BTW I don't fiddle with it all the time, that would be a false impression. But due to my carelessness, a speaker terminal came loose years ago and I had to open the rear panel to screw it back on. Unfortunately, I didn't pay attention to the type of wood at the time. But that's the only reason why I know how much tact and listening tests I had to do to carefully fasten the screws again.

On the other hand, I learn from this reviews that the sound of the SB 88 might be more "standardised" due to the glue while with each SB LS 3/6 there might be subtle different nuances from speaker to speaker (or do they use a torque spanner at SB?) and also that the sound might change over the years due to the perhaps slightly changing screw torque? Anyway, I put up with it and enjoy my SB LS 3/6.
 
Now that I have seen these somewhat older reviews about the SB 88 with photos of the xover I would like to say a word about the crossovers of the SB 88 and also my SB LS 3/6. It should please not be a fundamental debate about components because there are endless threads in countless forums.
What I would like to talk about is the relevance of the capacitors selected by the developer. These used yellow types are most likely polyester types. By the way, I am very happy with polyester types. In my 1977 Klipsch LaScala they exactly match the original sound of the old and leaking motor run caps. They are highly recommended by Roy Delgado of Klipsch who has done tests with many cap types as replacements for these original tin cans. Polyester caps meet the correct original Q values. Also in my first series Tannoy Canterbury Prestige with Tanoplas surrounds polyester types are used. And in the brand new Klipsch Cornwall 4, Heresy 4, AL 5 and AK 6 types polyester caps are used as well.
Why am I telling you this: Stirling speakers put a lot of emphasis on the xover and its fine tuning. It is even a relevant marketing claim that Derek Huges designed them. It is certainly not with cost savings to explain alone in the price range of the SB speaker especially since there are also inexpensive good polypropylene caps. My LaScala sounded terrible with modern polypropylene types. My Canterbury lost the famous Tannoy sound somewhat with the use of a Mundorf silver oil cap for the tweeter. So I stick with polyester. It is remarkable how the reviews rave about the sound of a SB LS 3/6. Then they show photos of the xover and talk about "exquisite" components because that's what people want to hear (at Mouser for 4 to 5 € polyester caps from good manufacturers like Nichicon or Kemet). Because it is a market in a parallel world. There are people who buy a single Duelund cap 5.6 uF for 6000€ but probably smash the total impedance of the xover as calculated and fine tuned by the developer. Of course there are very good speakers that were built from the beginning with polypropylene types, but this is a different case than this pointless replacement and "improvement" of a given circuit. Just my two cents.
 
DSCF9577 (2) by A60man, on Flickr

LS3/6 cabinets and crossover bought on ebay many years ago. Later I also bought the tweeters on ebay. Good LS3/6 bass units are almost impossible to find, so I used Daleford bass units, later changed these for the larger magnet Dalesfords like the ones used in Export Monitors. Put them all together in 2014 with the help of Tiddles.The speakers are effectively early Export Monitors, and very good.
 
…and also using polyester caps. Radfordman, thanks for sharing the pic. As it is a little bit blurred, did they use an autoformer to adjust the mids/treble section like the first series LS3/5a or do I see just coils?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top