HIFICRITIC audio review magazine
HIFICRITIC FORUMS
Current Issue
HIFICRITIC
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error
4 Pages<1234>
The BBC monitor sound Loudspeakers from Spendor Rogers, Harbeth.... - darkmatter
Share
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Previous Topic Next Topic
Offline phil page  
#41 Posted : 14 December 2017 03:18:50(UTC)
Retweet
phil page


Rank: HIFI Guru

Joined: 18/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 397
United Kingdom
Location: Norfolk

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Ahhh - when am I going to hear these systems, Simon?
Phil
Back to top
WWW
Offline darkmatter  
#42 Posted : 14 December 2017 13:48:19(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Originally Posted by: phil page Go to Quoted Post
Ahhh - when am I going to hear these systems, Simon?


Yes must arrange a visit!
Back to top
Twitter
Offline darkmatter  
#43 Posted : 05 January 2018 12:14:48(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
I am very tempted to try and get a listen to the Graham LS5/8, being a fan of big two way systems.

As I cannot find suitable drivers to build my own, this may be my only recourse? If only I could afford them Crying

Edited by user 10 January 2018 13:38:04(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
Twitter
Offline darkmatter  
#44 Posted : 30 April 2018 23:13:35(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
One comparison I would like to carry out is between the Graham LS5/8 and the Harbeth Monitor 40.2
Back to top
Twitter
Offline phil page  
#45 Posted : 30 April 2018 23:40:53(UTC)
Retweet
phil page


Rank: HIFI Guru

Joined: 18/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 397
United Kingdom
Location: Norfolk

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
I don't know where you can hear the Harbeth ones around here, Simon, but DB HiFi in Eye carries the Graham line.
Phil
Back to top
WWW
Offline darkmatter  
#46 Posted : 04 May 2018 09:38:00(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Originally Posted by: phil page Go to Quoted Post
I don't know where you can hear the Harbeth ones around here, Simon, but DB HiFi in Eye carries the Graham line.


Thanks I will arrange to make a visit to take a listen to them at some point
Back to top
Twitter
Offline Martin Colloms  
#47 Posted : 17 May 2018 16:22:08(UTC)
Retweet
Martin Colloms


Rank: Moderator

Joined: 15/07/2008(UTC)
Posts: 3,039

Was thanked: 48 time(s) in 47 post(s)
I well recall hearing the very early Spendor BC1.

I was familiar with the usual supects, KEF ,Celestion , Wharfedale, IMF, Goodmans, Morduant Short JBL, KLH, AR etc

and I thought I knew what was on my favourite dem records played on a Transcriptors Reference with an ADC 26 cartridge.

The Spendor was a massive shock. On a large orchestral piece, rich in complex percussion, you could hear twice as many

instruments, while instruments which were rendered largely percussive before, were now playing tunes.

Quite simply it represented a massive advance in reduced colouration which hitherto had imposed substantial masking.

This, and a natural timbre was the BBC attainment.

Matin Colloms

Edited by user 17 May 2018 16:22:44(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
Offline darkmatter  
#48 Posted : 17 May 2018 16:33:16(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Still not equalled by many modern designs
Back to top
Twitter
Offline darkmatter  
#49 Posted : 31 August 2018 10:19:28(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Originally Posted by: darkmatter Go to Quoted Post
One comparison I would like to carry out is between the Graham LS5/8 and the Harbeth Monitor 40.2



Surprisingly little online when trying to make a comparison between the two.

Still have to arrange a visit to DB HiFi in Eye to hear the Graham LS5/8
Back to top
Twitter
Offline darkmatter  
#50 Posted : 15 December 2018 22:38:47(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Originally Posted by: darkmatter Go to Quoted Post
One comparison I would like to carry out is between the Graham LS5/8 and the Harbeth Monitor 40.2



This is a comparison I would still like to make, when I find the time; will try and get to listen to the Graham LS5/8 which there is a dealer local to me.

Edited by user 15 December 2018 23:05:14(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
Twitter
Offline darkmatter  
#51 Posted : 15 December 2018 23:03:00(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
One interesting system that has come to my attention is the Rogers PM510 and the Chartwell PM450P

These are passive versions of the Rogers LS5/8 with passive crossovers instead of active drive using QUAD 405 amplifiers.

I have never heard either the Chartwell nor the Rogers PM510.

Edited by user 17 December 2018 13:37:44(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
Twitter
Offline phil page  
#52 Posted : 16 December 2018 04:02:14(UTC)
Retweet
phil page


Rank: HIFI Guru

Joined: 18/10/2011(UTC)
Posts: 397
United Kingdom
Location: Norfolk

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Happy to come with you to Eye, Simon...
Phil
Back to top
WWW
Offline darkmatter  
#53 Posted : 10 January 2019 17:16:54(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Martin Colloms Go to Quoted Post
Which version of the BC1 did you prefer?

Simon

Ironically, the original, before the super tweeter addition, and especially with the white PVC surround suspension for the bass mid cone. That particular standard from, 200Hz to 9kHz, has never been matched specifically for low coloration, transparency and inner tonal balance. This version had the fragile 8 watt Kraft paper voice coil former which at the time was perfectly matched to the cone assembly.

The super tweeter was a myth in hi fi terms, as available programme had little above 12kHz, if not the mics , then the recorders and the FM bandwidth limitation.

The super tweeter addition tortured the otherwise benign impedance loading, impairing the output of the driving amplifier; it also introduced phase errors above 10kHz and the inherent sweetness of the best HF1300 main tweeter was also mildly prejudiced.

It was introduced to make sure that line frequency whistle breakthrough from TV feeds could be heard during programme monitoring, and then sold as a virtue to Hi Fi customers as response extension.

That original BC1 could be compared with the Quad Electrostatic for comparably good tonal balance, articulation, transparency and low colouration.

Martin Colloms


Though the later versions of the BCI do not have the prefereable woofer with the paper coil and white PVC surround, I wonder if some of or any of the sonic magic could be restored by removing the super tweeter and the associated supertweeter crossover parts by removing the link to it?

UserPostedImage

UserPostedImage

Edited by user 10 January 2019 17:18:04(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
Twitter
Offline kengale  
#54 Posted : 15 January 2019 17:24:58(UTC)
Retweet
kengale


Rank: HIFI God

Joined: 25/11/2008(UTC)
Posts: 1,333
Location: UK

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 8 post(s)
Originally Posted by: darkmatter Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Martin Colloms Go to Quoted Post
Which version of the BC1 did you prefer?

Simon

Ironically, the original, before the super tweeter addition, and especially with the white PVC surround suspension for the bass mid cone. That particular standard from, 200Hz to 9kHz, has never been matched specifically for low coloration, transparency and inner tonal balance. This version had the fragile 8 watt Kraft paper voice coil former which at the time was perfectly matched to the cone assembly.

The super tweeter was a myth in hi fi terms, as available programme had little above 12kHz, if not the mics , then the recorders and the FM bandwidth limitation.

The super tweeter addition tortured the otherwise benign impedance loading, impairing the output of the driving amplifier; it also introduced phase errors above 10kHz and the inherent sweetness of the best HF1300 main tweeter was also mildly prejudiced.

It was introduced to make sure that line frequency whistle breakthrough from TV feeds could be heard during programme monitoring, and then sold as a virtue to Hi Fi customers as response extension.

That original BC1 could be compared with the Quad Electrostatic for comparably good tonal balance, articulation, transparency and low colouration.

Martin Colloms


Though the later versions of the BCI do not have the prefereable woofer with the paper coil and white PVC surround, I wonder if some of or any of the sonic magic could be restored by removing the super tweeter and the associated supertweeter crossover parts by removing the link to it?

UserPostedImage

UserPostedImage


Bizarrely, Russ Andrews sell an update for the BC1 which removes just about every component of the so-carefully designed crossover, and for some reason claims "improved dynamic range"! He (they?) also claim that this improvement can be added to just about every other similar speaker.

Have always admired the BC1 - the first time I heard them was at an IEE lecture by Dolby, but subsequently frequently heard them at BBC's Maida Vale Studios.

Back to top
Offline Martin Colloms  
#55 Posted : 15 January 2019 19:54:23(UTC)
Retweet
Martin Colloms


Rank: Moderator

Joined: 15/07/2008(UTC)
Posts: 3,039

Was thanked: 48 time(s) in 47 post(s)

The 'let's remove some bits' is always fun , and with the change in timbre and frequency balance it will go louder and sound more punchy.

However match the volume levels and use accurate program and it will be abundantly clear that the sound no longer resembles the source.

If that does not matter , enjoy the free for all.

Accuracy is not everything in sound reproduction and the BBC series were designed for a purpose and not necessarily to maximise entertainment.

Conversely accuracy to source can provide its own satisfaction in consistent orchestral perspectives, a multitude of instruments rendered with

their natural characters largely intact, and a sense of texture and weight often missing from hyped up examples where an over punchy mid is

complemented by a boomy near tuneless bass line.

Very few loudspeakers are compared with a live source during design.

Martin Colloms
Back to top
thanks 1 user thanked Martin Colloms for this useful post.
John S. on 17/01/2019(UTC)
Offline darkmatter  
#56 Posted : 16 January 2019 12:54:53(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Martin Colloms Go to Quoted Post

The 'let's remove some bits' is always fun , and with the change in timbre and frequency balance it will go louder and sound more punchy.

However match the volume levels and use accurate program and it will be abundantly clear that the sound no longer resembles the source.

If that does not matter , enjoy the free for all.

Accuracy is not everything in sound reproduction and the BBC series were designed for a purpose and not necessarily to maximise entertainment.

Conversely accuracy to source can provide its own satisfaction in consistent orchestral perspectives, a multitude of instruments rendered with

their natural characters largely intact, and a sense of texture and weight often missing from hyped up examples where an over punchy mid is

complemented by a boomy near tuneless bass line.

Very few loudspeakers are compared with a live source during design.

Martin Colloms


In my early days of experimentation (teenage) I did this carefully to learn about crossover design and the rationale of EQ / baffle step and other driver compensation circuits.

Fortunately I did this keeping one speaker original and carefully removing the existing network of the other and building afresh so that an original pair could be restored!!

Much fun had and learning in the process.

Conclusion

If designing afresh select drivers carefully to suit the purpose and design, if modifying be very careful about component selection matching inductors like for like resistance etc as all the electrical parameters are part of the overall design / EQ etc. Capacitors need great caution in their selection for replacement as well. I am therefore very wary of 'upgrades' to crossovers.

Cannot comment on the RA mods as I haven't heard them.

Just interested if some of the performance of the original two way can be clawed back by coverting the later three way BCI to a two way system by removing the treble circuit and super tweeter?

Edited by user 19 January 2019 09:55:15(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
Back to top
Twitter
Offline John S.  
#57 Posted : 17 January 2019 07:21:57(UTC)
Retweet
John S.


Rank: HIFI Newbie

Joined: 17/01/2019(UTC)
Posts: 2
United States
Location: Tucson, AZ

Thanks: 2 times
Martin Colloms comment above is right on the mark. I was a Spendor dealer back in the day and we sold many of the BC-1's. Very few box loudspeakers can match them for their accuracy and musical enjoyment. It was a sad day when it was discontinued. The SP-1 was a poor substitute and a big disappointment when it arrived. I see a number of claims by the current crop of manufacturers claiming to be the heir apparent. I have not seen the same attention to detail nor the overall quality in materials last seen in the BC-1. Ferrite has been substituted for ALNICO in every case and the use of MDF is seen in some brands as well. The claims for these variations have been stated to have been made because of economics, however, the current retail prices being asked are dear to say the least. I would imagine that the margins today far exceed those of the superior originals.
Back to top
Offline Togil  
#58 Posted : 19 January 2019 08:09:15(UTC)
Retweet
Togil


Rank: HIFI Veteran

Joined: 04/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 797
Location: Oxford

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)

I believe Ferrite was already used in later models of the BC1.
Hans
Back to top
Offline Martin Colloms  
#59 Posted : 19 January 2019 10:52:25(UTC)
Retweet
Martin Colloms


Rank: Moderator

Joined: 15/07/2008(UTC)
Posts: 3,039

Was thanked: 48 time(s) in 47 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Togil Go to Quoted Post

I believe Ferrite was already used in later models of the BC1.




Ferrite magnets , yes, also with the later black surround and the heavier higher power voice coil.

the increasing popularity of heavier bass pop programme drove these changes.

Martin Colloms

Back to top
Offline darkmatter  
#60 Posted : 19 January 2019 11:14:30(UTC)
Retweet
Simon Briggs


Rank: Administrator

Joined: 19/09/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,297
United Kingdom
Location: UK

Thanks: 35 times
Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 9 post(s)
Much interesting discussion about the PVC surrounds used on the earlier BCIs and hardening of them affecting sound quality, this also affected other speakers as well, making reference to and sound quality judgements dificult when listening to these older speakers.
Back to top
Twitter
Users browsing this topic
OceanSpiders 2.0
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET 2.2.3 | YAF.NET © 2003-2020, Yet Another Forum.NET
Follow HIFICRITIC Email HIFICRITIC follow HIFICRITIC on Twitter Follow HIFICRITIC on Facebook