[iGrant]

"How good are these Grant Fidelity speakers? My initial reaction to hearing them was to question whether I had disconnected the MG1.6s or had only imaged doing so. The performance was amazing.

The performance of the Grant Fidelity LS3/5As is on another level entirely. They have impressive dynamics and frequency range, especially as regards their bass performance. Their soundstaging is as good as it gets. There is also an honest and direct quality about them that leaves you feeling that you have heard the music, not the speakers. These speakers cannot be judged by their price—it's utterly irrelevant—they can only be judged by their performance, which is exceptional in every respect."

Kent Johnson

Positive Feedback

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue47/jungson.htm

Cheers,
Ian

[steve k]

I was fortunate to hear these speakers in Kent's system and I was shocked at the huge soundstage they threw out. It was quite amazing for their size and approaching that of his Maggies. This was my first experience with an LS5/3A. Now I see what all the fuss is about!
steve

[Wind Chaser]

What exactly is or qualifies as being an LS3/5a?

Back in the late 70's I heard a small pair of speakers by Rogers know as the LS3/5a.  I thought that was the model number of a specific speaker made by a specific manufacturer.  Over time it seems like it has become a generalized term for a mini monitor made by anyone and everyone hoping to cash in on the success of the original genuine article.

A I right or am I wrong?  

[steve k]

It's a specific BBC spec for a small monitor that could be used in BBC studios interchangeably. Theoretically, if any manufacture builds to this spec, they will all sound the same.
steve

[Wind Chaser]

So "LS3/5a" is a term coined by the BBC?

I know what you mean by theory, but I don't buy it when different drivers and components are used.  I see other differences in the structure of the cabinet.  And then there's the issue of the felt around the tweeters.  So even if the spec on paper is the same, that is meaningless as the sound can vary considerably.

Perhaps some of these LS3/5a knock offs are better than the original Rogers?  If so, why not make a distinction between the superiority of your product over the infamous LS3/5a?

[drphoto]

I don't know the answer to your question, but my introduction to high end audio was via this speaker. The one I heard was made by Chartwell. Spendor had a version, so that's at least 3 companies, counting Rogers.

In a small room, they were indeed 'all that'.

Like all things audio, it can't do everything, but does little wrong. Sins of omission for the most part.....the LS3/5A design in general. Not referring to the GF version.

[planet10]

erhaps some of these LS3/5a knock offs are better than the original Rogers?  If so, why not make a distinction between the superiority of your product over the infamous LS3/5a?

Rogers, Goodmans, Chartwell, KEF, Stirling Broadcast (and a few others i believe) also made LS3/5A. To meet the BBC LS3/5A specification a speaker had to meet a very tight set of specifications and has to be approved & licenced by the BBC. As said above the goal was consistency for mixing purposes, and that was of greater over-all importance than ultimate fidelity.

http://www.ls35a.com/

A licensed LS3/5A has a KEF B110 and a KEF T27 with a LS3/5A specific crossover... with the exception of the Stirling Broadcast LS3/5A V2 which uses modern drivers, but still meets those specs and is licensed.

I have no doubt that with modern drivers the LS3/5A can be bettered sonically (i know i've done it, i sold, owned & am currently restoring a pair of Rogers LS3/5A).

Ian's speakers may well outperform LS3/5A sonically, they may even be identical (i haven't heard it), but IMHO they should not be called LS3/5A as they have not been licenced by the BBC. I told him as much early on. I like Ian, and in general what he is doing for hifi, i hope he does not get sued for infringing the BBC or any of its licencees.

I wish this product well, but i wish Ian would give it a more appropriate name.

dave

[iGrant]

Hi Dave,

How about the LS3/5 Frugal-Phile

We kicked around name changes after our chats but no one trademarked the term LS3/5A and it would be highly improbable to do so now. I think we are pretty clear that the speaker is only based on the original spec (the prototypes sounded very close), but I wanted deeper and more accurate bass, which of course changes the mid-range. People who have never even heard about them may now discover the magic of the originals and search out getting a real pair from the official licensees.

I've shown them at every major show for the past year and a half, causing quite the commotion when those that know them found out I was running them with our A-534B 300B SET. I also just ran them at CES with Jungson's flagship 200s Class A monoblocks, $35k amps with <$1k speakers

Very few NA studios went with the LS3/5A because of the lack of accurate bass. Our version is what I would use for small nearfield and location recording and mixing.

One day I may do a GF 4311 clone, I loved recording with them but couldn't stand listening to them for playback.

The best speaker I have ever used for both studio work and playback is the Radford Monitor 180, a real treat to work and play with. I hope these get redone one day. Unfortunately I discovered them just as I was moving on from making music.

Oh, the credit for the GF LS3/5A goes to Jungson's 29 year old speaker designer. When we first met I suggested to him as a design exercise he build a LS3/5A clone, he nailed it and while we working on the RBS-1 speakers he came to understand the sound I was after. A design visit a couple of years ago to Jungson he brought them out revised and finished as my Xmas present. With me for that visit was a proud lifetime owner of the first LS3/5A models, he was stunned and wanted a pair for himself. That is when we decided to go into production.

Cheers,
Ian

[iGrant]

It's a specific BBC spec for a small monitor that could be used in BBC studios interchangeably. Theoretically, if any manufacture builds to this spec, they will all sound the same.
steve

Theoretically they can at best sound to spec, getting any two speakers from the same production run that sound perfectly identical is a next to impossible, crossover tolerances would have to be <0.1% and there is way too many parts in the crossover to achieve that, then there is speaker tolerances. Fullrangers have the best chance at achieving this goal and if the BBC really needed that, they should have gone the fullranger method. We had Auratone, Ampex and other fullrangers in NA for these purposes. Time on a speaker also changes it's character. So to me that part of the spec goal was doomed from the start. Now as an audiophile playback speaker, they are special.

Cheers,
Ian

[iGrant]

I don't know the answer to your question, but my introduction to high end audio was via this speaker. The one I heard was made by Chartwell. Spendor had a version, so that's at least 3 companies, counting Rogers.

In a small room, they were indeed 'all that'.

Like all things audio, it can't do everything, but does little wrong. Sins of omission for the most part.....the LS3/5A design in general. Not referring to the GF version.

I'd say well over 2,000 people have seen them at shows and no one questioned the name, including the licensed manufacturers. Two people have to date (well 3, me too questioned the name, you are the 2nd. Of course if anyone or enough really complains we will, but for now they will be what they are. Also see my response to Dave's post.

Cheers,
Ian

[Wind Chaser]

I merely asked the question because as Dave pointed out, there are quite a few different manufacturers using the term which I thought was the model number of the originals made by Rogers.

I've seen the original Rogers LS3/5a fetch as much as $3000 for a used pair.  According to their website it seems Rogers still makes them and the current version is their 60th anniversary edition.  Does anyone know how much they retail for in Canada or the USA? 

Given the difference between the price and the looks of the Rogers and the GF, I think a shoot out would be very interesting.