WTD: Rogers LS5/9 Speakers

[donmarrese]

Didn't have much luck finding a pair of MA 4's MK2 so I've upped the ante, and now looking for a pair of Rogers LS5/9's: Not Grahams ...

Are there any knocking about around here?
Tell me what you have...LS5/9 wise

[Pharos]

Of all the BBC originated speakers I think the LS 3/6 was the best, the 5/9 and 5/8 were flawed, but Harbeth bettered the 5/9 with his work. Maybe one of his second hand. I haven't a clue what the Graham rebirth is about.

[donmarrese]

Good point Dennis on the LS3/6, although I do have a pair of BC1's, I could be heading for duplication?
I basically want the midrange magic of the LS3/5a with some bass thrown in = LS5/9 ...thanks for the input...

[robpark9]

I have the original bbc ls5/9 not the modem one, a pair although not matching


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[donmarrese]

Pm'd

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

[DSJR]

Of all the BBC originated speakers I think the LS 3/6 was the best, the 5/9 and 5/8 were flawed, but Harbeth bettered the 5/9 with his work. Maybe one of his second hand. I haven't a clue what the Graham rebirth is about.


The BBC designed for THEMSELVES, knew what they wanted and the5/8 and 5/9 were NOT flawed in quite the way you put it. They're positively neutral compared to your average Pro-Ac, PMC (both with very deep crossover suckouts of several db in some cases) or smaller US models with a 'batman' response curve (boom, shriek and fizz). The 5/9 does need careful positioning though (what monitor doesn't) and can sound tubby too close to the wall (the response shape) or stark if pulled too far out. Get them right though and they sound really good, the clarity and deep soundfield making long term listening very pleasurable (these were often used in editing suites as my pair were, so an aggressive up-front 'monitor' balance isn't something a producer would want).

I'm selling my Rogers 5/9's if you're interested. there are several on eBay in various states of disrepair and condition (many were mounted on brackets with screw holes in the cabs and so on), where this pair are pretty much perfect with good corners and nothing on the black ash cabs a bloody good polish wouldn't sort! Drive units and cabinets match and imaging is fine.

PM if interested. They're on the bay with Graham sourced 5/9 boxes too so can be safely sent. Trying to get better pics posted and price is negotiable to a degree...

[Pharos]

You say; "the5/8 and 5/9 were NOT flawed in quite the way you put it"

I have not stated any particular way in which I consider them to be flawed, so why do you say "in quite the way you put it"?

It is generally accepted that in both cases the developed prototypes were very good, but in production something went awry and the frequency responses became non uniform, the reasons not determinable. Some BBC designs also had a droop at the Xover point, and there was also the quandary about whether or not the Gundry dip was deliberate or not, with theories about close monitoring necessitating it to ameliorate fatigue.

[system7]

As a serious loudspeaker man, The Rogers LS5/9 was a good design, but really just a typical 8" polycone plus tweeter design.

https://www.markhennessy.co.uk/rogers/ls59.htm

This Wilmslow Audio design ticks most of the same boxes:

https://www.wilmslowaudio.co.uk/sm108-near-field-home-studio-monitor-1880-p.asp

It's not cheap at near £1000.

[hifi_dave]

Good point Dennis on the LS3/6, although I do have a pair of BC1's, I could be heading for duplication?
I basically want the midrange magic of the LS3/5a with some bass thrown in = LS5/9 ...thanks for the input...

The pair DSJR has for sale are a proper pair and in excellent condition.

[donmarrese]

I'll have a look...but could be out of my budget...we'll see....

[Patrick Dixon]

It is generally accepted that in both cases the developed prototypes were very good, but in production something went awry and the frequency responses became non uniform, the reasons not determinable. Some BBC designs also had a droop at the Xover point, and there was also the quandary about whether or not the Gundry dip was deliberate or not, with theories about close monitoring necessitating it to ameliorate fatigue.

As someone who was involved with taking on BBC designs and commercialising them (not audio products though), the BBC only designed and built small numbers of any product for their own use. They didn't consider licensing and production until after they had what they wanted, so whilst their products performed similarly, they were generally all hand built and tweaked individually. Which doesn't tend to scale up very well.

[DSJR]

You say; "the5/8 and 5/9 were NOT flawed in quite the way you put it"

I have not stated any particular way in which I consider them to be flawed, so why do you say "in quite the way you put it"?

It is generally accepted that in both cases the developed prototypes were very good, but in production something went awry and the frequency responses became non uniform, the reasons not determinable. Some BBC designs also had a droop at the Xover point, and there was also the quandary about whether or not the Gundry dip was deliberate or not, with theories about close monitoring necessitating it to ameliorate fatigue.


Generally accepted by whom may I ask? Alan Shaw who had competing boxes to sell and who was annoyed the beeb went over to Dynaudio actives for general noise-box use (and some Genelecs I believe for something a little better in the small speaker department although one TVC studio had ATC 20ASL pros I remember from a pic before it was stripped out). You may just find the balance was tweaked to suit the balance engineers working next to them for long stretches and in any case, Dudley Harwood had something to say regarding the upper mid dip (you're a member of the HUG, go look it up as that's where I read it).

LS5/9's carefully set up on highish stands (the tweeter should be at or slightly above ear level I found) and carefully positioned aren't as seamless as the amazingly good Harbeth C7-XD model that bowled me over a couple of months back and the soundstage will appear to be pushed back a little due to the deliberate tonal balance, but this is nothing compared to a typical domestic issue PMC (which can have phasey bass issues too) and far less wooden-wardrobe sounding than a typical ProAc. They'll need a sensible fairly powerful non-foo amp like a Quad 606 rather than a 'HiFi DEEEEETAIL' screamer type (mine spent their professional life driven by an HH VX300 which I still use in the office system occasionally).

For £1500 or less, 5/9's can make for an interesting smallish speaker (Graham want a fortune for a modern if good looking version and Harbeth want even more, although these latter are by far the best of these descended models). I appreciate AoS members are most often out for a bargain, so maybe £1500 or so may seem too expensive, but it depends of you want a tatty set with holes in, or a well kept version that's never been thrashed or overdriven... BBC samples weren't always matched after a few years as a faultly box would be replaced out of stores I gather...

[Pharos]

I have read a great deal about the discrepancy between the original design results and those exhibited in production models, and AS did post graphs showing these differences, but I do well appreciate that he can rather easily become annoyed; he gave me three infraction points for saying that I could hear the difference between two amplifiers.

Later, a little while ago, he suddenly declared, astounded, that he could also hear differences, and so I asked him by PM to both apologise to me, and withdraw my infraction points, but I had no reply from him. I also had initially had supportive mails from other members saying things like 'What next, detention or lines?'

"You may just find the balance was tweaked to suit the balance engineers working next to them for long stretches and in any case".
That is a point that I have already made.
I have read sufficient to think that Dudley Harwood would not stray from the theoretical ideal of flat.

"but this is nothing compared to a typical domestic issue PMC (which can have phasey bass issues too) and far less wooden-wardrobe sounding than a typical ProAc". I did not understand this part of your sentence.

"Harbeth want even more, although these latter are by far the best of these descended models". This is consistent with my assertion.

"BBC samples weren't always matched after a few years as a faultly box would be replaced out of stores I gather... "
I doubt that a change of only a box would affect performance detectably.

My Hi-Fi Friend has collected almost all of the 2 cubic feet variants, Spendor, BBC, and Rogers, and after extensive comparison we think the 3/6 is the best of that group, and we each twice confused them with my own ESS Heil/Rogers midwoofer redesign because they were so similar, with the exception of the greater bass extension from the Rogers mid/woofer from the 5/8 on my ESSs. We also had a pair of 5/9s and they were OK, (I do not have a personal axe to grind here), and he later had Harbeth SHLs and their 3/5 equivalent, which he sold. After a period with very expensive JBLs, he has settled on LS50s with a sub, (for now), and I remain confused with my current setup.

[robpark9]

A pic I found of one of my pair still a great looking speaker!28953


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DSJR]

Dudley Harwood's very first HL speaker also had a large upper mid dip (something to do with his religious beliefs and not listening to reproduced human voice - or summat?), but this was quickly sorted and by the HLIII version of the late 70's, they'd been 'sorted' well and I reckon many contemporary music lovers here would love 'em assuming they hadn't gone off. Alan S did improve quality control but like many late 80's Spendor's post Spen's passing, there seemed a tendency for a dull, over ripe and 'thick' tone I believe all but banished in the latest XD models which on first listening do seem light on their feet for the first time without any hint of screech. We both know the ego's of many personalities in this industry and how some of them get out of control, but that's part of this fraternity I think and since I had something of an epiphany when comparing 'blind' a few years back, I shut my noise mostly and let 'macca' take the flack (bless him) for having broadly similar opinions and experiences :D

[Pharos]

I have a very vague recall of Dudley dipping to reduce the effects of poor Xover anomalies from the distant past, or maybe someone else.

[donmarrese]

Oops. looks like I've done it again...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hamKl-su8PE

[donmarrese]

So, after all that....I take it that apart from David's LS5/9's, no one has a pair to sell?

[Pharos]

I see DSJR that you posted immediately after:

"*Important note: After Harwood retired from BBC Research Dept. and started the Harbeth company, younger engineers took control of designing the final generation of BBC monitors. They had their own agenda and influences and the designs were heavily criticised - see scathing HFN review) reset the BBC philosophy away from natural sound and the use of speech as a design arbiter to a sound somehow tuned to an entirely different usage case in heavily damped control rooms (rock monitoring at Maida Vale was the stated target) with a very deeply sucked-out midrange and presence; unsellable outside the broadcast market. That change in leadership and direction could be said to reversed 50 years of progress and to have killed-off the BBC's involvement in loudspeakers."

[system7]

I am fascinated Dave and Rob. How much do you want for these fascinating and beautiful relics?

My experience is that 50 year old speakers are a can of worms. The Audax 1 1/2" tweeter was a goodie. But there are newer equivalents. 8" polycones tend to sag and rub voicecoil. Old electrolytic capacitors usually need replacing.

It's like buying an old motorcar. You are going to have to get the toolkit and the can of oil out. :lol:

[Pharos]

I've seen even BBC engineers criticise the 1 and 1/4" tweeter, and it only goes up to 15k, which may or may not bother you.

[donmarrese]

Still looking...

[Barry]

I've seen even BBC engineers criticise the 1 and 1/4" tweeter, and it only goes up to 15k, which may or may not bother you.

Since the upper frequency limit for the GE- Zenith stereo FM broadcast system is 15kHz, I assume the BBC were not interested in reproducing/monitoring anything above that.

[Brian28]

http://www.emporiumhifi.com/pre-owned/rogers-ls5-9-loudspeakers-pair/

[donmarrese]

Cheers Brian, but I've been all around the houses with what's available on all forums and eBay...the ones on offer are generally ex. studio use so generally have been Sh*gged, drilled holes in the side etc...I did have a pair lined up but it didn't work out.



http://www.emporiumhifi.com/pre-owned/rogers-ls5-9-loudspeakers-pair/

[donmarrese]

Still looking for a pair of Rogers LS5/9's, got £1.1k to play with

[gerlando]

Central Audio should have a pair of Graham LS5/9

https://www.centralaudio.co.uk/index.php?page=stock

[Lawrence001]

Not quite £1.1k though!

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

[donmarrese]

Thanks Lawrence, yes that price Gerlando is a bit rich for remakes of the LS5/9. Spoken to the guy that has a pair of Graham's LS5/9's on the bay...£1.7k is still outta my reach....
Will have to settle for a set with holes in it and saggy bass units...

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

[donmarrese]

Still looking...

[donmarrese]

Still looking..for Linda?
nope gave her the elbow, Rogers LS5/9's of course!

[donmarrese]

Still looking....LS5/9's alert

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk