advertisement


Falcon Acoustics re-introduce the Q7 MiniMonitor.

I've heard Greg's system with LS3/5a and more recently the Klipsh. I'm a huge fan of the LS3/5a derivatives, having owned the Q7 and owning P3ESR.

However......heresey it may be but if my home were larger I'd have the Klipsh any day. They were stunning (I mean ideally I'd have both !).

But the reality is they are far to big for my room, and returning home and playing music that evening I remain utterly happy with what I have.

They just do different things that's all. And moving house to accommodate larger speakers is a step to far for me ☺️
 
Tha


I think you’re getting confused. Greg is a big fan of the falcons he owned. And said as much above. He merely states that he wouldn’t expect LS5/5a plus sub to match the dynamics of the Cornwalls. Hardly a damning comment. Missing the attributes of one speaker doesn’t mean another one doesn’t suit you as well, or even better.

Further up the thread Conan states that LS3/5a aren’t suitable for music. Is it that that you’re disagreeing with? In which case I agree with your disagreement!

No, I'm not confused.

Around 50 years ago I built some large transmission line speakers with the T27, B110 and the B139. There was nothing lacking in dynamics that I can remember and I preferred the transmission line above bass reflex.

Does it match the dynamics of the Klipsch? I don't know as I have not heard them side by side.
 
Don't know about the current tiny rooms in Japan, thought they all had rice paper dividers between the "rooms" in one big space. Horns? Often they have no deep bass and the bamboo flutes etc. music that they like to listen to has not much bass content unlike the "western" music.

Back to the discussion at hand: You are forgetting what the LS3/5A was designed for and what they are doing brilliantly.

If you want to listen to music in a larger room than a broom cabinet or a van then perhaps you may want to listen first to a decent setup with a sub where the bass is removed from the LS3/5A and letting the LS3/5A do only midrange and HF duty before just stating that it is no good. You may be surprised how enjoyable that can be as several others can attest to.

I have difficulty understanding where you are coming from: You mentioned earlier that you will be missing the the Falcons which is suggesting that already you feel there is something missing from the Klipsch Cornwall setup. In a certain way it reads like you acknowledge that the HF and midrange of the Falcons is very good (because that is their strength, not their bass) yet in this last posting you say the opposite in that the midrange is no good.

Personally I find that after what 57, 58 years? of having had lots of different equipment the sealed mini monitors like the LS3/5A, ProAc Tablette 10, Kef CS1 and CS1A meet my current requirements the best. I fully expect the Q7 to fall in the same category with an even better voice reproduction of the human voice than the Tablette 10. And to get the best out of these small speakers they'll need an exceptional amplifier but that is another story.

If your needs are best met with the Klipsch and the Leben then I have no issue with that. Enjoy them but stop telling others that the LS3/5A or Q7 are no good.

You don't hear me saying that the Klipsch is no good, it just does not meet my requirements of realistic voice reproduction.

Let's leave it at that.
Peace.

Great post. It's fine to discuss the merits of various bits of kit but ultimately it's what satisfies the individual user.
 
Not really. I think you'll find a wide range of user implementation distances for the little boxes. Nearfield is a good option, one amongst other good options.

It was certainly designed as a nearfield monitor and will rapidly run out of headroom if asked to drive a large space. It is a sealed box with a 5” bass-mid. Physics applies. That said well installed in a nearfield listening context and driven with a genuinely good and synergistic system the LS3/5As can sound massive.

PS As I’ve mentioned on other threads the LS3/5A’s upper bass bump can work wonders in certain positions in typically small UK rooms by deliberately placing them on the 40Hz (or thereabouts) room node. This is usually found firing across the short dimension of the room and well away from the rear and side walls, plus allowing a bit of room reinforcement from the back wall (i.e. place the chair fairly close). As what little low bass they have is so tight and well controlled it can energise this node without any of the awful boom larger ported speakers tend to produce in a similar location and the upper bass boost stops them sounding lean. Get it right and they grow in size a lot! I’ve not experimented with this as much as I’d like, but I’ve certainly heard enough to know there is something to it. It does work. I’ve achieved it in two rooms so far.
 
As I’ve mentioned on other threads the LS3/5A’s upper bass bump can work wonders in certain positions in typically small UK rooms by deliberately placing them on the 40Hz (or thereabouts) room node.
All true, in my experience too. I also found that room treatment can reduce the boomy effects of the bass bump to a minimal artifact of the sound, and frees up the speaker to be more 'creatively' positioned. In fact, the sensitivity of the ls3/5a to position in the room, and the room furnishings, is part and parcel of their fun-ness. Today I was messing about with extreme toe-in, crossing them a foot in front of my nose, speakers about 9 feet away. Another interesting result!
 
I apologize that I not worded my earlier post clearly:

"Enjoy them but stop telling others that the LS3/5A or Q7 are no good."

I should have said:

"Enjoy them but stop telling others that the LS3/5A or Q7 are not dynamic when using it with a sub where the LS3/5A (or Q7) is relieved from bass duty".

FWIW The B110 has been succesfully used as a midrange in several speakers, not only DIY, e.g. the Bailey transmission line, but also in the Kef Reference 105.

@Conan:
Once the LS3/5A has been relieved from bass duty by using a sub then (together with a sub) it is perfectly capable of playing music in a larger room. Bose has been using small speakers augmented with a sub for a long time.

@Tony L:
Yes placing them about 1.2 meters out from the long wall will reinforce the 40Hz room node and the basshump will not be as obvious.

In my opinion there is no longer a need for large boxes (e.g. the Klipsch) when the Q7 is integrated with a good sub in normal living areas unless one is into extreem sound levels (that are damaging to one's hearing).

I'm not going to say anything more on this subject.

Peace to all.
 
Last edited:
Interesting that the reason that the Q7 is preferred to the LS3/5A by some is cited to the bass response changing the overall balance.
My issue with the LS3/5A is the slightly nasal midrange. Is this fixed by the Q7?

(FWIW I think JR149s are better than LS3/5As because they are less nasal in the mids, albeit they are a bit less overtly detailed).

Incidently, I think the JR mates with subs better than the LS3/5A because the failings of the LS3/5A become more apparent when the overall standard of reproduction is improved by the benefits of subs.
 
Interesting that the reason that the Q7 is preferred to the LS3/5A by some is cited to the bass response changing the overall balance.
My issue with the LS3/5A is the slightly nasal midrange. Is this fixed by the Q7?

(FWIW I think JR149s are better than LS3/5As because they are less nasal in the mids, albeit they are a bit less overtly detailed).

Incidently, I think the JR mates with subs better than the LS3/5A because the failings of the LS3/5A become more apparent when the overall standard of reproduction is improved by the benefits of subs.
In my room the Q7 had a slight saddle in the lower mids and elevated high frequencies compared to the JR149. The JR149 has stronger output in the lower mids and therefore sounds both thicker/fuller and more forward than the Q7 to my ears. My room was however heavily treated with broadband absorption when I made this comparison, which I have since discovered eats lower mid frequencies. If I were able to conduct the same comparison in an untreated room I suspect the Q7 would have a more forgiving balance than I experienced, but I'm pretty sure it would still be more detailed and analytical than the 149 in the upper frequencies. The Q7 does beat the JR149 on bass extension and definition IMO.
 
Last edited:
Does it match the dynamics of the Klipsch? I don't know as I have not heard them side by side.

Nothing with KEF drivers is in the same universe as Klipsch when it comes to dynamics. High-efficiency speakers have crushing, scary dynamics. I can't deal with the coloration. I want it all - the timbre of the BBC-family, the dynamics of Klipsch or Altec, and the delicacy and ease of ESLs. Is that really so much to ask?
 
Nothing with KEF drivers is in the same universe as Klipsch when it comes to dynamics. High-efficiency speakers have crushing, scary dynamics. I can't deal with the coloration. I want it all - the timbre of the BBC-family, the dynamics of Klipsch or Altec, and the delicacy and ease of ESLs. Is that really so much to ask?

Not at all! When you find it, please let me know and I will gladly join you!
 
Nothing with KEF drivers is in the same universe as Klipsch when it comes to dynamics. High-efficiency speakers have crushing, scary dynamics. I can't deal with the coloration. I want it all - the timbre of the BBC-family, the dynamics of Klipsch or Altec, and the delicacy and ease of ESLs. Is that really so much to ask?

And those speakers need to have the size of a shoebox? ;)

Was the LS3/5A not voiced using the ESL and if set up right be very close in performance?

I do not think it is purely a matter of the driver: imho it is more a case of what enclosure has been used. Putting the B139 in a Kalrson box gives it some output with very little movement that is unbelievable - it has to be experienced. SImilar a Fostex FE-127 in a Voight pipe does move far outside its linear movement allowance and does not go very loud. Put the same driver in a horn and it hardly moves and the output levels are pretty decent.

But it would make sense that a Klipsch goes loud - mid and high since they are normally horns. Woofers are big enough to be able to move lots of air (i.e. going loud).
 
Last edited:
Sitting and listening to the Q7s, I felt they reminded me of a pair of original Spendor SA1s
I owned some years ago.
The SA1s were ex. BBC ones with XLR fittings.

These little Spendors’ dimensions were close to those of the Q7s’, being the same height as the LS3/5a but
25mm wider and 60mm deeper.

As for how they sounded ( compared with the LS3/5a ) I think the SA1s had a smoother top and were slightly better
in the bass.
They were, however, warmer and less analytical in the midrange.

The Q7 addresses these points and is much closer to the LS3/5a.

I throughly enjoyed the SA1s for the time they were with me.
My conclusion was they were ‘mini BC1s’ in the way they sounded.

They now reside in Hong Kong with an enthusiast for small BBC type speakers.
 
Sitting and listening to the Q7s, I felt they reminded me of a pair of original Spendor SA1s
I owned some years ago.
The SA1s were ex. BBC ones with XLR fittings.

These little Spendors’ dimensions were close to those of the Q7s’, being the same height as the LS3/5a but
25mm wider and 60mm deeper.

As for how they sounded ( compared with the LS3/5a ) I think the SA1s had a smoother top and were slightly better
in the bass.
They were, however, warmer and less analytical in the midrange.

The Q7s addresses these points and is much closer to the LS3/5a.

I throughly enjoyed the SA1s for the time they were with me.
My conclusion was they were ‘mini BC1s’ in the way they sounded.

They now reside in Hong Kong with an enthusiast for small BBC type speakers.

BUT Martyn... : Are you enjoying listening to the Q7 and could you live with these long term? Will these be your new favourite speakers? In the end that's all that matters.

Did I mention that for me a realistic reproduction of voices is important and that I can listen to the lyrics in the songs?

Ahh Hong Kong - I lived there for two years just during the handover and enjoyed it very much. Always wanted to visit again but unfortunately no longer possible due to health reasons.
 
Yes, I am enjoying the Q7s and could live with them.

If I’m completely honest though, it’s the BC1s which have given me the longest long-term
musical satisfaction.
On the main system they’re used with an LP12/Mission 774/Denon 103 and a serviced and tweaked Audiolab 8000A and
records sound just ‘right.’
I can, and do, listen for hours.

The Stirling V3s and Q7s are used on a second system ( Marantz CD player/Nait 2 ) and sound so good.
I’ve run the Q7s with the main system and they do sound excellent, but I prefer the BC1s.
Spencer Hughes’ skill still shines through...
 
Last edited:
Yes, I am enjoying the Q7s and could live with them.

If I’m completely honest though, it’s the BC1s which have given me the longest long-term
musical satisfaction.
On the main system they’re used with an LP12/Mission 774/Denon 103 and a serviced and tweaked Audiolab 8000A and
records sound just ‘right.’
I can, and do, listen for hours.

The Stirling V3s and Q7s are used on a second system ( Marantz CD player/Nait 2 ) and sound so good.
I’ve run the Q7s with the main system and they do sound excellent, but I prefer the BC1s.
Spencer Hughes’ skill still shines through...

Two observations here:

1) The BC1 is quite a bit larger than the LS3/5A and the Falcon Q7. Therefor it is not a true competitor of the Q7 and should not be seen as a valid (as small as possible enclosure) alternative.

2) Considering the age of the BC1 drivers then I wonder are they still within specification? If not then what you hear is that close to as when they were new?

Did you ever compare the BC1 to some of the larger Spendor or Harbeths?
 
Last edited:
I never claimed the BC1s were a true ‘competitor’ to the little Falcons.
What I said is that I preferred them ( on my main system ) to the Q7s.

The Spendors are old and very possibly out of spec. but they have a superb midrange.
For the kind of music I listen to ( light orchestral, female vocalists, etc. ) they are perfect.

The bass end is criticised by some, but as heavy rock ( Is it music ? I suppose it is for some )
is out for me it’s not relevant.

I’ve never heard larger Spendors or Harbeths in my own home, only briefly on unfamiliar equipment.
I couldn’t accommodate speakers any larger than BC1s anyway.

Once I did seriously consider Stirling Broadcast LS3/6 speakers ( BC1 size ) but never took the step.
My Spendors are like old friends, loved and nurtured for decades.
 
Last edited:


advertisement


Back
Top