Talk:LS3/5A

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:LS3/5A/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jamesx12345 (talk · contribs) 20:08, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll take this one on, having seen it languish far too long. James^x12345 20:08, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

• • Note: my responses indented:
• "as opposed to the "LS5" loudspeaker, intended for studio monitoring" - does "studio monitoring" here mean an indoors studio?
  • yes, proper studio environment
• "using headphones is unsatisfactory" - is there a straightforward reason for this?
  • none was cited, but then listening through speakers and through headphones isn't the same experience at all.
• "There were no commercial constraints." - does that mean that they didn't design it to be sold, and so there was no emphasis on "features"?
  • Yes. It was primarily for own use, and the Beeb, being the Beeb, didn't care about cost required to achieve the necessary quality. £100k is quite a large sum of money to be spent on development in the early seventies
• "built using the" - mention that these are drive units.
  • added.
• "had initiated tendering" - odd use of past tense - relative to what?
  • The follow-on is that the spec had to be changed in mid process. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 02:52, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in this part of the review. James^x12345 19:32, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• "Its internal walls are heavily damped, only specific speaker..." - already mentioned.
• "The name was..." - it isn't immediately clear that the name is Rogers.
• "Spendor's production amounted..." - the other produces could be introduced better.
• "and became easier to drive" - redundant to decrease in resistance.
• "matched by computer." - not very precise. "matched to each other by computer testing" or something is a bit clearer.
• The Legacy section is a bit odd. The source mentions the LS3 a few times, but I don't really see the connection
• Will this come to anything?
• Note 1 is a bit confusing. A note on what the year means (first manufactured?) would help.

• Just pinging Ohconfucius (talk · contribs) you to let you know there are still a few things to be done. James^x12345 13:46, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
  • @Jamesx12345:I have now tried to clarify the points raised. Further comments welcome. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 03:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. Looks fine now. Thanks, James^x12345 21:36, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on LS3/5A. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6LalxpWSR?url=http://www.stirlingbroadcast.net/ to http://www.stirlingbroadcast.net/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.webcitation.org/6LalxpWSR

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:04, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

iFi clone

This should be added: https://ifi-audio.com/products/retro-ls3-5/ csloat (talk) 03:14, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Spendor derivations until today

As far as I know, Spendor built all years derivations of the 3/5, today the Classic 3/5, ref. https://www.spendoraudio.com/classic-loudspeakers/ , scroll a little bit down. I miss this in the article. Are there reasons against adding this information? Please let me know or discuss. Thank you in advance, regards Wikisympathisant (talk) 20:02, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Put in Spendor's successors of the LS3/5A, regards --Wikisympathisant (talk) 12:56, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Article review

It has been a while since this article was reviewed, so I took a look and noticed uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 23:31, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

LS3/5A

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Issues have not been resolved. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:30, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Uncited statements, including the "2014 – 15 ohm LS3/5A back in production" and "Falcon" sections. The lead is too short and does not summarise all major aspects of the article. Z1720 (talk) 04:18, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Comment: while at first I suspected copyvios, the page m.review33.com/forum_msg.php?db=1&tstart=0&s=&topic=63030607080912&start=15550&sort=1&number=17224 had actually copied the text of the Wikipedia article, so copyvio does not apply. Assessment. ozmoozmo@enwiki (talk:contribs) 22:40, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.