how much??!! (Rogers LS3/5A)

With that I have no dispute, which is why I've always had a subwoofer with them. With the latest one (a Linn Sizmik 10.25), they sound better than they've ever done. My beloved Monteverdi Vespers have never sounded so good before. It's not quite like actually being in San Marco, but it isn't half-bad either.

 

The standard commercially available LS3/5a's didn't come with thin wall ply construction. It was considered too expensive.

Having heard BBC 001 & 002, which are not thin wall vs some thin wall, I would say the matching of the drivers and crossovers has more effect than the cabinet. Or maybe they just need 30 years of running in

Some manufacturers made signature or reference versions with thin wall (Kef and Harbeth for instance). It is possible to buy reference cabinets from Stirling Broadcast who can also supply all the parts.

The clones were made using a pair of Chartwell LS3/5a's as reference and with the help of a couple of members of the mailing list for listening sessions. They knew they could compete so made them off spec, but kept to the same size.

Coming from you James that is almost a compliment

 

I knew they didn't do lossy joints on production LS3/5s for cost reasons, but I didn't know about the thin wall. In any case, where does the weight and that bass come from. Are they ported?

 

Joel

In all honesty I don't know. I believe they've used a driver with a huge magnet a la Dynaudio, so maybe that might account for it.

 

There's an article on exactly that in June's HiFi News actually, but to paraphase massively none of the current similar designs are as good as the original.

 

And for what it's worth.

A test was done of various original LS3/5a's. The Harbeth 11 ohm being the best. You can read about it here http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.whatton/shootout.html

Out of the modern types I've heard, the one I prefer is again the Harbeth.