Sound Artist LS3/5A speakers aren't too bad (but there's a catch or two)

You have to smile when the argument of ever increasing prices and well heeled are mentioned in relation to genuine licensed LS3/5a speakers and understand that the vast majority of these buyers are in fact from mainland China who have no desire to purchase imitations and local made copies but value the original issues. Westerners on the other hand relish in the cheapness of a purchase and the appearance of imitation as a worthy achievement. I'm not surprised that the manufacturer branded his creation LS3/5a, he has achieved sales success by association and poorly executed low cost manufacturing.
As an aside, part of our non hifi business involves numerous dealings with manufacturers in China and every delivery is met with a sense of apprehension as quality control is very hit and miss and the concept of not changing an agreed prototype or design is something not entirely understood on their part. If you find one who does supply exactly what you sign off on, they are worth their weight in gold.

 

I always suggest an audition in order for someone to make such a decision, but unfortunately that’s not possible with a speaker made by a maker sniping from a long way off. If that sort of speaker purchasing decision increases in prevalence as time continues, there will also likely be an increasing number of audiophiles dissatisfied with their purchases. That will occur not because some speaker is inherently bad, but merely because it doesn’t actually sound good to the particular audiophile. It’s a riskier way to spend a tight budget.

Inherent in your comment is the idea that just because a company, somewhere, has taken the time to attempt to clone an established design that it must perforce be good. That has never always been the case, nor will it ever always be the case in the future.

Somebody needs to start two internal clubs on SHF: the members who tie better and better performance to higher and higher product pricing in one club, and in the other club the members who insist that better and better performance of established designs are tied to lower and lower pricing solely because they wish it to be so. The problem is, neither position is valid.

Economies of scale where retail pricing is concerned kick in once initial materials costs, the investment in R&D, investments in molds and templates and other items have been paid off or accounted for or nearly/fully amortized. None of that happens until product wholesale and retail sales cross a certain threshold while priced at a level that produces gross profits. If popularity continues unabated, the retail price does not go down though. If popularity begins to wane somewhat, then the retail price is brought down. If a potentially equally popular new version is about to be released, the price of the outgoing version is reduced so that the new version can (hopefully) hit the gross margin needed to pay off the aforementioned (typically somewhat less scary secondary) development and production costs.

But when some product makers invest in nothing more than repurposing an existing operation to clone (successfully, they hope) an established design, there are no costs to amortize or otherwise pay off. And when, additionally, the product makers are sitting in the midst of a supply chain that produces every cheap version of every cheap part in the entire world (magnets, copper wire, aluminum, low cost speaker drivers, capacitors, resistors, etc., etc., etc.) and are also able to take advantage of a markedly lower cost of living where employee wages are concerned, you get a $600 speaker that looks a lot like an LS3/5A. Top that off with that same product maker who doesn’t have to support regional distributors with inventory or retail dealers with inventory for showroom auditions, and it makes the $600 price point easy to understand. The product maker is dealing with dramatically different and vastly lower production costs, dramatically lower parts costs, no manufactured inventory to for distributors and dealers, and no marketing costs.

So why, oh why, doesn’t the Sound Artist LS3/5A sound exactly as good as the better LS3/5A speaker models in comparison assessments? According to every metric I can think of, the people at SA had an opportunity to eat everyone’s lunch - Harbeth, Falcon Acoustics, Graham/Chartwell, and so on. But they didn’t. The reason is that doing something properly and executing a design well, as opposed to just doing it cheaply, is a lot harder than it looks. But the cheap knock-off makers have been making the same sort of stuff for years and decades and generations. That lots and lots of consumers tell themselves it’s all fine and all probably just as good only goes to show how fully so many people can be made to extend illogical rationalization in order to force themselves to spend money to populate their household with yet more things.

The only physical similarity between Harbeth P3ES2 and P3ESR speakers and an LS3/5A is the general cabinet size (but the P3ESR is deeper and wider). Nor does Harbeth call its speaker an LS3/5A. Harbeth has stated that its design arose from the lineage provided by the LS3/5A tradition, only better. That’s called legitimate competition, and Harbeth has repeatedly stepped up over the years with the R&D efforts and accompanying investment capital to produce original products that stand up not only for enthusiastic reviewers, but also for people doing comparison assessments. That’s where the rubber meets the road.

You’re 100% right that the LS3/5A and its tech are known quantities. So why is the Sound Artist version no better than the average quality knock-off it actually is? The answer lies in cheap parts in the difficult-to-decipher crossover (difficult for me, anyway), really cheap generic drivers as far as I can tell, the wrong cabinet materials, and the wrong internal damping material.

Ah . . . plaudits . . . from a couple of online-eyeball-driven reviewers, and from some early adopters who have no comparisons with established LS3/5A models, and from a few enthusiasts on the forums who’ve never heard the speakers but still think they’ll really like them. So from that we’re to think, or even insist, that all is well? I disagree. Nor would any of this be the first time that a cheap version of something being touted as an alternative to the real product was promoted as being just as good or almost as good. In almost every case, it’s nonsense.

Implicit in your repeated inference to “well-heeled” and “less well off” is the idea that audiophiles on a tight budget can’t afford established high-quality components. That’s pure nonsense. All that a tight budget means is that - just as I had to do back in the day when money was far tighter than I ever like to recall - saving longer, buying second-hand, and getting the most from what an audiophile already owns is the correct and most appropriate mantra. Great sound and deeply enjoyable music are the results.

Suggesting otherwise - suggesting or implying that because an audiophile can’t afford a particular component, that there’s a problem with the world that must be corrected by the production of a cheap clone - essentially positions audiophiles on a budget for disappointment and the flushing down the drain of $600 that could have been saved toward the purchase of a better product such as the real thing from the second-hand market after a somewhat longer savings period. This is not a hardship.

Feeding the Monsters of Cheap, overseas, simply because an audiophile has a powerful yen for an LS3/5A does not, in this case, get him a good LS3/5A. So add that statement to temper all of the “plaudits” as you put it. There’s still no doubt that some audiophiles will land the Sound Artist speakers and enjoy them, possibly because those audiophiles are coming from something with poorer sound quality. Keep in mind that in the title of this thread and in the body of my comparison assessment, I never stated that the SA speakers sounded bad. My final assessment is that they sound like competent $600 speakers, which is great because they just happen to be priced at $600. For audiophiles to rail against that or to be grumpy that a $600 speaker is not as good as a $2000 speaker makes no sense at all.

 

Falcon has recently changed their LS3/5a to what they call a 'Gold Badge' edition. It has a new crossover.

They had a small number of the original version at the importer - I just picked up a pair in cherry at a dramatic savings. If you're interested in a pair of Falcon's and don't need the latest version check with a Mofi dealer to see if they still have any of the older pair in stock.

 

Toy makers battle weekly with their Chinese manufacturing managers over substitutions of dyes, plastics and a long list of other items that, if used, won’t pass inspections, won’t meet Health Canada guidelines, and won’t constitute safe products. Product instructions printed on the back of packaging is changed because it fits better (but then makes no sense when read) necessitating reprints and the associated materials waste and lost time. It’s an endless battle, and knowing about it in advance doesn’t in any way reduce the stress of having to constantly and unremittingly deal with it. Take a look at the internal battles waged at companies like Toymax and a number of others and you’ll wonder why anyone persists in doing business in China. The answer is simple: stressed out managers in Canada, the UK, the U.S., and so on, are a dime a dozen. But maintaining profit margins through the use of a vast supply and manufacturing base in which the business religion is, “I can make it for you cheaper!” is where you find the big money.

I know a shirtmaker. He does made-to-measure suits and dress shirts and charges a fortune. Good for him. He used to send approximately half of his orders to a Chinese schmatta factory that did some of the custom work. 50% of the Chinese orders were messed up: single stitching where there should be double stitching, lightweight fusing where there should be heavier fusing, cheaper quality buttons (of sometimes the wrong color), uneven shoulder seams, puckered stitiching underarm, misaligned yokes, cheaper cloth, thread so lightweight that he defied anyone to use it in a normal sewing machine without snapping every few seconds, and on and on, all because the guiding mantra is, “I can make it for you cheaper!” So he switched to a different schmatta factory. Exactly the same problems. He eventually brought everything in-house and hasn’t looked back. He had to train tailors and take on apprentices. His customer base is notably smaller now, and only slowly growing again. Nobody is holding any tag days for him - he’s not poor - but the offshore custom manufacturing experience was a disaster. The terrifically hard working and funny and personable guys he dealt with at the Chinese factory - family men, reasonably well-educated, driven, dedicated, kind; I met them repeatedly - lived by one rule alone: “I can make it for you cheaper!”

I have no philosophical issue with the attitude. The catch - and there’s always a catch - is that a product that works correctly and stands up to real use and occasional scrutiny and that can be used to help grow a business, has to consistently and reliably meet the quality standard of the original design or the original order or the original expectation. If the company making the product cares primarily only about cranking it out cheaper and cheaper, in the audio component business the result almost always amounts to a fail.

Audiophiles are a confusing bunch, sometimes. After some period of scrutiny and analysis and critical listening, they declare a component of some sort to meet the audiophile standard (however that happens to be defined at the time for the particular component). Then follows a period of wider distribution and sales during which a long stream of reviewers declare the product to be great and well-focused and, above all else to sound wonderful. Audiophiles go to shows and exhibitions (remember those?) to audition and critique and generally be very, very hard in their judgements about all the products on offer and on display and being auditioned. But after the product has been around for long enough, perhaps some patent(s) run out, perhaps the trademark falls into disuse or into some legal cul-de-sac that renders it fair game, or perhaps there never were any barriers to duplication other than a you-stay-in-your-yard-I’ll-stay-in-mine unspoken industry rule, and perhaps a couple of enterprising companies decide to do their own version. Initially, the quality of the imitators is usually high and, occasionally, better than the original. But when the cult of desire and approval for the particular component works its way through to the larger general mass of audiophile consumers, there always arises a desire for a more affordable version of the component. So what happened to all the original critiquing and analyzing and toughness and demands for the best possible quality? Suddenly audiophiles, en masse, forget about all that and declare their willingness to settle for secondd-rate? That’s where the clone makers come in. “I can make it for you cheaper!” Except, most of the time, it’s not really the same product and after initial expectations wear off it doesn’t sound as good either.

The same goes for knock-off Gucci and Louis Vuitton shoulder bags. First glances are terrific. You can marvel at how exact the copy seems to be. Then the ‘pleather’ shoulder strap begins to peel, the plated pot-metal top clasp starts to corrode, the lining tears if you so much as look at it the wrong way, a seam on the bottom opens up, and whoever is still using the bag starts to look like a hobo. “I can make it for you cheaper!”

 

The notion of poor QC and inferior Chinese manufacture is now an anachronism. Still exists, of course, but many manufacturers on production standards alone will choose China, industry dependent. Certainly in hifi manufacture it is well-regarded beyond costs of labour etc.

The notion of implicit value is an individual and relative concern. I've no truck with anyone spending any amount on any product. Now, more than ever, it is a reality that cost and performance in hifi are no longer mutually exclusive concepts. It's largely well-worn tech, and there's sound argument for feeling one should pay accordingly.

The appearance of the Sound Artist is not surprising. Indeed, one would have to be naive to not think it'll soon be supplanted by an even better model, maybe at an even more attractive price. Indeed, as you mention, legitimate competition - if it is that - will survive. Otherwise, it's so long.

 

If I were a Chinese company like SA know what I'd do? I'm make a new version of the KEF 104a/b. Those were great speakers!

 

A reboot that was up to the quality of the original? I might even line up for it. I put mine up on consignment last year. They sold quickly. I still miss them occasionally - truly great speakers.

 

Excellent insight and serious effort!
it seems like the cheaper cabinet of the SA is what is mainly blurring the sound by coloring the bass and midrange. it could be an excellent candidate for some diy bracing and damping. does that sound reasonable?
interesting about the tone accuracy of the falcon, no wonder it has been praised ad infinitum at stereophile.
very cool info about the TS, a brand inhave only heard in passing and did not pay much attention to.
it appears that they have sourced their woofers from dynaudio which accounts for the excellent bass. dynaudio makes the best nominal 165mm woofers in the business in my opinion that exude top quality bass. they do need an early crossover though and here totem does the right thing and uses an oversized tweeter to handle lower than typical mid frequencies. by your accounts they did ok with this one, something even dynaudio themselves have not figured out yet. i have to hear them, hopefully at next august axpona.
cool stuff agitator.

 

the ls50s are kind of an enigma to me, they are the clearest untransparent speakers i have ever heard. they sound clear because of the elevated upper midrange but to me fail to have quality insight into the music.
i would also bet that most fail to pair them with optimum amplification. most moderate powered solid state amps run out of gas and start to drive fatigue when trying to drive the inefficient copper eyed monoliths. i have heard them quite unfatiguing with parasound bridged amplifiers and sustained high volume. they can take the abuse and not break a sweat. contrary to popular opinion the ls50s sound awesome with 20 watts or more of push pull valve power.

 

They are fussy about setup and amp. They sound wonderful with Hegel.

 

I’ll be the judge of that

 

My own LS50 pair have been out on long-term loan, but I get them back on Sunday. I’ll be hooking them up for the first time to an Icon Audio ST40 MKIV Plus that runs KT88 output tubes in either ultralinear or triode mode. To my ears this integrated amp is a Class A marvel. I run it mainly in triode mode and it produces prodigious amounts of current effortlessly. It will be the first time I’ve heard the LS50 at home with tube amplification, so I’m looking forward to the experiment.

 

exciting, waiting for your impressions.

 

I think I found the woofer used in the Sound Artist speakers:

https://canada.newark.com/mcm-audio...&CMP=KNC-GCA-GEN-Shopping-Low-Optoelectronics

It looks identical. $12.50 each.

 

Mofi Distribution didn't have any but they pointed me to Don Better, he sounded pleasant on the phone. Was this your source or have you bought from him before?

 

This discussion of the SA speakers has also been threaded with suggestions of good amps for the LS50s, which is also interesting. Browsing this forum awhile I've learned LS50s are regarded as hard to drive, and so naturally I wonder if I could do better than old Peachtree Audio Decco that I use -- and some suggestions are counter-intuitive, given the conventional wisdom that they need a lot of watts. Long way of saying looking forward to your impressions.

 

Just to chime in on the LS50/tube tangent, I had great success with LS50s with a 22 watt SET Line Magnetic amp in my office system. Beautiful midrange...a sound I will always come back to.

That being said I have not swapped them back in since I bought P3ESRs back in the spring, but probably will soon (planning to keep both). The Harbeths have been a great companion for working from home, and when I feel the need for something with a little more excitement in the presentation I have other speakers in the house that do that for me.

 

China rocks!

 

I can buy a bunch of authentic LS/35a speakers if I want, I can put em in the freakin shower. I just want some decent looking versions that sound decent for the old bedroom amp. Half the time they will only be getting 10 percent of my attention. I’m sure these will do for someone like me that doesn’t want to spend 2k on a “ real” pair.

 

One of the things to be clear about is that RMS watts quoted by amp makers don’t directly equate to sufficient power and the ability to adequately drive a given speaker load. An amplifier is, ideally, a steady-state voltage source. It means that the amp should make the same voltage at the speaker terminals no matter what the input signal is doing. To maintain that constant voltage no matter what the input signal is doing and no matter how the speaker’s impedance and phase angle wander instantaneously throughout the frequency range every millisecond, the amp has to be able to produce the requisite current on demand in order for music to sound good. It’s an equation with a couple of variables, but with a constant (non-varying) voltage. Since the amp’s output impedance doesn’t change, the speaker cable resistance doesn’t change and the voltage at the speaker terminals ideally doesn’t change very much, varying amounts of sufficient current must be produced to account for the impedance changes in the speaker.

Look for amps that can double (or come close to doubling) their maximum continuous (not peak) rated wattage when the nominal speaker impedance is halved from 8 ohms to 4 ohms. You’ll find that in the specs. That’s an indication that the amp can deliver lots of current and thereby handle speakers that are demanding.

A Class A amp topology might only be 30 watts continuous (RMS) per channel, but because its design and output stage can supply lots of current, most such relatively low continuous wattage designs are capable of driving almost any speaker load extremely well. I’ve got a Luxman L590 AXII which does precisely that, and there are many, many other high quality examples. They make KEF LS50 speakers sing as good as they can be. But nobody has to use an expensive Luxman integrated amp to do a great job with the LS50. There’s a boatload of other significantly less expensive amps and integrated amps that do a wonderful job with the LS50.

 

Like I stated a few times (and in my comparison assessment), the Sound Artist LS3/5A is not bad. Treat the speakers respectfully - don’t overdrive them; the drivers are cheap units though they spec out acceptably well - and they’ll be fine. Nominal impedance is 11 ohms.

 

You’re right. The best Chinese operators can do a fine job of a lot of different things, audio products included. That’s not in evidence with the Sound Artist speakers though. The problem is, you’ve skipped lightly over the elephants in the room. That is to say, the best Chinese manufacturing is in many factories up to the standard of the best Canadian, U.S., UK, French, German, Danish, etc., etc., factories. The main difference is the one you skipped over - labour costs. The other difference is an even bigger elephant - industrial environmental standards. Of course I can spec, part up, and build something decent far less expensively in China that I can in Canada or Ireland or Ukraine for that matter. That’s because the standard of living is lower in China so labour costs are far lower and environment costs are far lower, and on and on. No doubt, as a monied middle class continues to expand in China and as the wealthier strata continues to expand as well, they’re already demanding cleaner air and cleaner water at the same time as factory workers are demanding better working conditions, better wages, and so on.

I’m seeking, almost exclusively, audio products that are either domestically made in Canada or in the U.S., the UK, western Europe and central Europe. As the Chinese domestic marketplace matures and becomes a more balanced competitor, I’ll check back. As you or another member pointed out in this thread already, Chinese audiophiles are doing their best to buy Falcon Acoustics and Harbeth and Graham LS3/5A speakers, and amps and turntables and cartridges and DACs from iconic European, Canadian and American designers and producers because they don’t yet have the confidence in their domestic audio industry at the so-called high end.

We never went through that in Canada, the U.S., the UK or Europe. That’s because designers and makers in those regions invented all of the high-end audio **** in the first place. The Chinese will get there too, and a few examples exist already. The Sound Artist LS3/5A is not one of them.

 

Great info Agitater.

 

Fair enough, like I said “ I’ll be the judge”

 

Hi Agitator,

Thanks for a superb review and thread. Well, I can say the the SA is better than the Wharfedale Diamonds I was using ;-)

One of my speakers has something rattling inside if I update it. Was the front baffle difficult to remove? Would I need to use something to reseal it on replacement?

Many thanks,

M