advertisement


Falcon ls3/5a gold vs q7

I can nearly help you OP. I've heard the Falcon LS3/5a 'regular' crossover fairly extensively and completed my Q7 regular yesterday. Though to be fair you did ask about Gold badge and I have no experience of these so please take my words in that context.

I posted a thread on the assembly and initial thoughts over at the Hifi Wigwam. Apologies if referring to a thread on another Forum is seen in a bad light, I know the 'wam is sometimes :).

I could ramble on at length (well, I did actually), but the bottom line is Jerry advised that the Q7 are like their LS3/5a but with more bass. Brief words that speak volumes. This heart to your answer lies here I feel..

I'm a long term P3ESR owner and absolutely adore the Q7. At their price they should have the LS3/5a gene pool of speakers quaking on their expensive stands.
 
Something I noticed in an extended listen with Q7s yesterday is how beautifully they work, nearfield, with the higher resolution radio 3 streams.

I guess that should not be a surprise, given their heritage, but such was the beauty of what I was hearing that I found myself listening well past midnight. The quality survived a reduction in volume too.
 
raysablade said:
Something I noticed in an extended listen with Q7s yesterday is how beautifully they work, nearfield, with the higher resolution radio 3 streams.

I guess that should not be a surprise, given their heritage, but such was the beauty of what I was hearing that I found myself listening well past midnight. The quality survived a reduction in volume too.
Click to expand...

That made me smile - listening to mine last night (assembled Saturday) but with malt. Problem - addictive extended listening = bit of a thick head !
 
raysablade said:
Something I noticed in an extended listen with Q7s yesterday is how beautifully they work, nearfield, with the higher resolution radio 3 streams.

I guess that should not be a surprise, given their heritage, but such was the beauty of what I was hearing that I found myself listening well past midnight. The quality survived a reduction in volume too.
Click to expand...
THIS means a lot :........listening well past midnight.
Obviously, either this speaker is very good and musical a lot or it really suits you well.
I would tend to believe it’s both !
 
I've had my gold crossover Q7s for a couple of months now and the change from ATC 11s has been quite challenging. They are indeed more revealing at the top and that, combined with the (understandably) different bass response and my own (electronically-aided) hearing, has made for a few enjoyment ups and downs during that time. There is no doubt that they are very good at what they do. Vocals can be absolutely sublime and bass is agile. On Pentangle's 'Basket of Light' Jacqui McShea's vocals seem to come from a wide, high space, Danny Thompson's bass is appropriately 'woody' and Terry Cox's glockenspiel actually sounds truly metallic. So, yeah, I'm enjoying them more and more. Will also be curious to hear what they sound like on the end of my Quad 303, due back from refurbishment at Amplabs shortly. And I can only echo what others have said about Jerry at Falcon, who was extremely helpful and a pleasure to talk to.
 
I have had my Q7 gold crossovers since January this year. It sounds obvious but worth re-stating, they're ls3-5a's with a slightly extended and fuller bass. If you're undecided about the sound and characteristics of the ls3-5a's then the Q7s are probably not for you.
If you have a relatively small listening room, and you want accurate reproduction, clarity and musicality then they'll take some beating at the price. But they are going to be unforgiving of some of your collection! On the other hand they surprise everyday. One of my favourite LPs has always been To The Limit by Joan Armatrading , it's sounded awful for 30 to 40 years, LP12, Harbeths, Sugdens nothing worked.......Q7's absolutely nail it.

Mine are the cheapest element of my system, but they will be part of my system in preference to amplification and front end because I won't get that accuracy of reproduction at anything like the same cost.
 
Perfect but flawed?
I so nearly bought a kit last year. My home made Tannoys were being very 'unforgiving' on bad/bright recordings and anyway something smaller and more intimate appealed as a winter project, but then, as above, i started reading about Q7's being 'unforgiving' too.
Looking at the design, I was wondering if anyone can put their finger on why that is? I don't remember the KEF T27 having that rep, and anyway, compared to some metal dome tweeters I thought it positively 'sweet' :) The gold crossover can't be to blame so? I wonder therefore if it's a problem of the original design brief. The result of too tight a cabinet, to little resonance, too much clarity and accuracy????
The speakers were designed to monitor. So not to replay poor recordings. They therefore do a wonderful and accurate job if the recording engineer and disc cutter did likewise, but those designers and users surely never heard anything more than a live recording or mastertape playback at a guess.

Do owners think that the design brief is set in stone? I imagine they do, and when right, it's unbeatable. Maybe it's a specialised speaker and not for the collector of poor recordings, and I'll have to live with that hahah.

One other thing, I'm not sure that adding valves always 'solves' these problems. Valves to me have proven a sticking plaster with the tannoys. My Leben 600 sounds wonderful with them, but although it masks some of the OTT hardness on some records, it is a mask, not a cure. But HiFi = compromises so?

Ill stop rambling, but if anyone does know where, in the design, that unforgiving nature lies, maybe me and my tool shed can start wondering about 'the perfect compromise' which ofc will not be to spec :)
 
For me it's a mindset, if the Q7s are showing up poor production or shortcomings in a recording then that's the point.
Personally, I prefer that to coloration or a system signature
 
MarkL56 said:
For me it's a mindset, if the Q7s are showing up poor production or shortcomings in a recording then that's the point.
Personally, I prefer that to coloration or a system signature
Click to expand...
I agree but I have the Tannoys for that. I decided to keep them for exactly the reasons you state Mark. I am interested in the design however and what might be done to ease off the ferrocity:)
In the Tannoys I adjusted the driver mounting bolt tightness, altered the internal bracing, replaced some mid range caps and added a grille, all of which, with the leben, have just done enough to make the system keepable. I wonder if the Q7 kit has ever been tweaked in some way?
 
Rockmeister said:
Perfect but flawed?
I so nearly bought a kit last year. My home made Tannoys were being very 'unforgiving' on bad/bright recordings and anyway something smaller and more intimate appealed as a winter project, but then, as above, i started reading about Q7's being 'unforgiving' too.
Looking at the design, I was wondering if anyone can put their finger on why that is? I don't remember the KEF T27 having that rep, and anyway, compared to some metal dome tweeters I thought it positively 'sweet' :) The gold crossover can't be to blame so? I wonder therefore if it's a problem of the original design brief. The result of too tight a cabinet, to little resonance, too much clarity and accuracy????
The speakers were designed to monitor. So not to replay poor recordings. They therefore do a wonderful and accurate job if the recording engineer and disc cutter did likewise, but those designers and users surely never heard anything more than a live recording or mastertape playback at a guess.

Do owners think that the design brief is set in stone? I imagine they do, and when right, it's unbeatable. Maybe it's a specialised speaker and not for the collector of poor recordings, and I'll have to live with that hahah.

One other thing, I'm not sure that adding valves always 'solves' these problems. Valves to me have proven a sticking plaster with the tannoys. My Leben 600 sounds wonderful with them, but although it masks some of the OTT hardness on some records, it is a mask, not a cure. But HiFi = compromises so?

Ill stop rambling, but if anyone does know where, in the design, that unforgiving nature lies, maybe me and my tool shed can start wondering about 'the perfect compromise' which ofc will not be to spec :)
Click to expand...
I think a lot has to do with the perforated brass grille that's fitted to the T27. This increases HF output, I'm not entirely sure how but I recall reading that it causes an increase in pressure in the airspace between the dome and grille. I suspect it also alters dispersion. I certainly noticed a significant difference when I added them to the T27s in my IMF MCR2A, the top-end became less forgiving after fitting the grilles, but spatial cues / reverb tails were much improved. I also suspect the 3/5A's / Q7's "saddle" in the lower mids relative to comparable mini-monitors like the JR149 and S3/5R2 also contributes to its perceived cooler / less forgiving presentation, though it does make for very clear and uncoloured vocal reproduction.
 
Last edited:
Martyn Miles said:
They are extremely good speakers and a viable alternative to my Stirling V3s.
Both models do something special with music.
Click to expand...
Martyn, I believe you have the Q7s with regular crossovers? How are they in the treble region, compared to the Stirling V3s?
 
Yes, the original crossovers.
I think the V3s top end is marginally better than that of the Q7s, at least with my amplifier ( Nait 2) and
the music I play.
 
ToTo Man said:
I think a lot has to do with the perforated brass grille that's fitted to the T27. This increases HF output, I'm not entirely sure how but I recall reading that it causes an increase in pressure in the airspace between the dome and grille. I suspect it also alters dispersion. I certainly noticed a significant difference when I added them to the T27s in my IMF MCR2A, the top-end became less forgiving after fitting the grilles, but spatial cues / reverb tails were much improved. I also suspect the 3/5A's / Q7's "saddle" in the lower mids relative to comparable mini-monitors like the JR149 and S3/5R2 also contributes to its perceived cooler / less forgiving presentation, though it does make for very clear and uncoloured vocal reproduction.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Interesting.

JR' 149's have been oft suggested as a more liveable presentation for those with 'mixed' collections. In the 80's I made a pair of LS3/5a's for a pal. he's a musician and uses them to this day to monitor his folk output. Wonderful in his small room for that.

The short answer to my ramblings is probably that, if it could have been done, it has been ;)
 
ToTo Man said:
I think a lot has to do with the perforated brass grille that's fitted to the T27. This increases HF output, I'm not entirely sure how but I recall reading that it causes an increase in pressure in the airspace between the dome and grille.
Click to expand...

It is worth noting that the LS3/5A has pretty tightly controlled dispersion via the felt surround and tygen grille. It is all very much part of the BBC design and LS3/5As are not to spec without these parts. I’m not sure if this thinking is carried across to the Q7 (it obviously isn’t if they are used without grilles or the felt).

PS Tannoys really should not sound ‘unforgiving’! To me that rings alarm bells either with compression driver alignment or their bolt tension, or the drivers being torqued down too hard to the cabinet. Get them right and they are warm, clear and articulate and remarkably non-fatiguing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top