I’ve just bought some little friends for my JR149s:
A pretty much NOS pair of Spendor S3/5R that popped up in the pfm classifieds after Matt J’s three-way shoot-out with Celef LS8s and ProAc Tab 10s. The price was great, condition absolutely as-new, so why not? Everyone should have more than one pair of mini-monitors!
I’ve always been curious to contrast and compare the JR149s to a well regarded modern mini-monitor and the 3/5Rs have a very good reputation and from what I had read were voiced to my taste (soft-dome tweeter, sealed box, ‘classical/acoustic’ balance etc). I was surprised by just how small the Spendors are, they are a good bit shorter than the 149, though do have a slightly larger bass unit (130mm vs. 110). The cabinet size is likely very significant as the 149s are very thin wall so as well as being physically bigger will hold more air volume for their size too.
Initial impressions: The Spendors seem less efficient despite a claimed 84db (I’d always thought the 149s were 83-84db), certainly by 2 or 3db. My Audio Synthesis stepped-attenuator passive has steps graduated at 1db over the range in use here and I was needing to crank it a couple of clicks to get a similar level on my sound meter / sound as loud. The JR149s sound very noticeably bigger, more dynamic too, they just have way more smack to drums, kick to bass guitar etc. Bass-wise the 149s dig down deeper, but are drier. Very noticeable on on say Donald Fagen’s Morph The Cat where the 149s do things they simply have no right to do. My suspicion is the amp is a factor here and this picture may change with a good bit more power.
The S3/5s really start to compete on classical, the string sound is just beautiful, really superb. I’ve always felt that, whilst largely mitigated by the crossover, the JR149s have just a hint of the notorious Bextrene ‘quack’. If one were to draw a chart with say a Quad ESL (absolutely no ‘quack’ at all) at the ‘0’ end and say a Kan I (no attempt whatsoever at attenuating it) at the ‘10’ end then the 149 would likely score a ‘1.5’, maybe even a ‘2’ on a particularly bad day. It is hardly ever noticeable, but just occasionally a CD will come up that makes strings just a tiny bit prominent, gives just a slight hard edge to voice, but it really is a minor issue that listeners are unlikely to notice unless they are actively looking for it. The Spendors have absolutely no hint of it. I suspect these little Spendors and say a Quad 909 or better could be all the classical system anyone could want. They are certainly very good.
My intention here was never to unseat the 149s, I will own and enjoy them for the rest of my life. This is purely a mix of curiosity, research, opportunity, and enjoying the fact little speakers are so easy to switch over why wouldn’t one have a couple of flavours available?! It is always fascinating to assess vintage classics against more current products.
PS Caveat: This is my initial impression driven with my Leak Stereo 20. I will revisit this comparison at length sometime next year using one of the new Onix OA21 Icons and hopefully a SOAP PSU. As such this is what I hear with both speakers driven with a truly superb little 10 Watt valve amp, the JR149s on the 16 Ohm tap, the Spendors on the 8 Ohm, as spec-wise that makes the most sense. This little amp may well not be up to driving the Spendors properly, so my description of a lack of dynamics and scale compared to the 149s may not be entirely fair. 149s, like LS3/5As, are very easy to drive despite their inefficiency, it is one reason for their ongoing popularity. Caveat 2: the little Spendors really are very close to NOS, so may not even have broken in yet! They may well relax after a good few months use, as most speakers seem to. I also used different speaker cables; Chord Rumour 2 on the JR149s (it is the right size to pass through the grommet on the 149s base and is connected directly to the crossover) and Van Damme Blue 4mm on the Spendors as I have a nice terminated spare set, both are about 4 metres in length.
