spica and ls3/5a's


I have owned Spica's and love the imaging, but never heard the famous ls3/5a's. They are a good deal more costly, but I am very curious. If I really liked the spica's- would I like the ls3/5a's better?
joekras
My response won't help you, but I have considered writing the very same thread! I've owned two sets of TC-50's for almost 20 yrs. now... always wondered about the LS3/5a's but have never heard them...
I've owned both in the past, the Spicas never able to dislodge the LS3/5a, however. The Spica appealed to many people because of its greater dynamic range and better bass extension over the BBC monitor. But the Spica could not "disappear" like the smaller LS3/5a. The box is always present and audible. Additionally, the Spica is no match for the 3/5a midrange beauty and clarity, and its woofer and tweeter are dynamically disjointed in woofer/tweeter transient behavior. The Spica woofer sounds slow compared with the 3/5a B110 Kef driver. Last, if I remember correctly, the Spica is nominally rated at 4 ohms, dipping to a low of 3.7 ohms. That's not a load at which most solid state amps sound their best, even if they operate fine. On the other hand, the LS3/5a is 15 ohms or 11 ohms, which extracts better sonics at lower power from most solid state amps.

The Spica is a good speaker, and was especially so in its day. It has a persistently warm vocal balance that some people like. But for me, it was no contest years ago. The LS3/5a was simply more objective and expressive than the Spica, and it's difficult to find both points of advantage in one speaker, let along packaged in a camera that small.

Phil
213cobra, with all due respect, while there are exceptions, I think that your view of impedance loads and solid state amps is just the opposite of common wisdom.
No.

I have owned spica angelus and tried Ls3/5s for an extended weekend demo and the imaging of the ls3/5 is nowhere near that of the spicas.

I couldn't believe it at first given that the ls3/5s are considerably more expensive, but after 2-3 days when the spicas were replaced the pinpoint imaging (totally absent on the ls3/5s) returned.

I eventually changed my spica angelus to Green Mountain Audio Europas because the spicas were too difficult to move. The Europas are slightly more forward than the spicas but better in all respects, including imaging.

Comparing Green Mountain Europas and LS3/5s it's not even close. The LS3/5 is a nice speaker ... unoffensive, but it is an ancient design. The only way in which the LS3/5 could be preferred is that it is less revealing of upstream equipment, and produces more of a "romantic" sound than the Europas.
Unsound,

With respect to sound of solid state amps and speaker impedance, I am reporting results, not "common wisdom." Common wisdom tells us a lot of things that just aren't true. Some speaker designers are formulating to 6 ohm nominal loads because "most solid state power amplifiers are designed to that optimum." But I've yet to hear a solid state amp that sounds better at 4 or 6 ohms than it does at 12 or 16.

Anyway, I don't care about common wisdom. I'm interested in the resulting sound. The poorer top end quality of the Spica TC50 compared to an LS3/5a on most solid state amps is consistent with the deleterious effects qualitatively that can be heard when, for instance, a double set of 8 ohm speakers are wired in parallel and series for comparison.

Irrespective of the Spica's strengths, it sounds tonally incorrect to me compared to the LS3/5a, and quite apart from that I think its qualitative character -- even if the design decisions driving tonality were left intact -- would prove improved on most amplifiers if its impedance were 8, 12, or 16 ohms. "Most amplifiers," of course, implying solid state by virtue of their incidence in the amp population. In 30 years I have never heard a solid state amp sound its best into 4 ohms or less, though I certainly assume there must be exceptions.

Phil