Originally Posted by
DSJR
Bottom line is this, and I think Martyn Miles would possibly agree - well sort of...
The following is from a realist BC2 owner (BC2's with replacement later (better) SA2 drivers from Terry Miles, Spendor's current designer I believe.
BC1's are ancient, with VERY talkative boxes which resonate badly on anything over a lowish volume. Power handling is pretty pathetic and these boxes sound as if they're going to shake to bits with modern wideband music played at anything over modest levels - bass is pretty awful in any BC1 form unless the boxes are several feet off the ground as the BBC often used them. The BC2 has a far better bass at the expense of a good, but less than perfect integration at the crossover due to the larger voice coil diameter, although I understand that removing the dust cap and fitting a 'phase plug' a la current Spendors helps here with this driver.
The other thing is that BC1's, especially knackered old white-surround and out of spec alnico drivers samples, are the domain of collectors and fetch prices now which are way outside of their actual full frequency range ability these days..
Ah now, abilities... When designed and bought by the Beeb in huge numbers (the LS3/6 never sold in any real quantities according to a letter from Spen Hughes published on the Yahoo Spendor Group and the mid bass was boxy and tuneless with a fragile wobbly cone setup I remember), the BC1 was regarded as an adequate quality general 'box' but nowhere near the proper monitors they used (largest being the LS5/5 I think). In our large dem room, BC1's always sounded small and box-bound in comparison with bigger speakers like the BC3 and IMF's we used to sell, which sounded so much 'free-er' and out of the box... The BC1's nador was in 76 or so, where the suspension was incorrectly supplied to Spendor and sonics suffered. A totally new driver followed (longer lived spec-wise ceramic magnet) and power handling increased to then acceptable levels.
Towards the early 80's, the Rogers Studio 1 was thought to out-perform the BC1 and became very popular and it wasn't until 1983 or so when the SP1 came along. It's my personal view that the SP1 is as good as a *typical* BC1 where the latter excels in a narrow part of the midrange, but trounces it everywhere else in terms of sweet treble consistency and bass quality. I think the SP1 looks far better too.
At the end of the day, it depends on the music you play. If it's 'rock' in any shape or form, I respectfully say you'd be better off looking elsewhere (Rogers LS7's or Studio 1a's/SP1's or summat). Alex_UK here has a great pair of SP1's which are fine for his room and listening levels. I dare say a modern pair of larger KEF Q series' speakers would comfortably out-perform them, although I haven't done this comparison. The odd great pair of BC1's do exist (Martyn's current pair are, I think he told me, better than his previous long-term ones), but I honestly believe rose-tinted specs are being used all over here, but me as well..
Sorry Chaps, I can't rave over BC1's, despite looking back very fondly on my times with them. They're just too flawed on wide-band digitally sourced material and don't go loud enough for many younger listeners.. I'm terrified of blowing my BC2's, so they're never let loose and they're used with an amp that self protects all its gain stages internally...