Stirling LS3/6 Speakers

tmallin

WBF Technical Expert
May 19, 2010
962
374
1,625
71
Chicagoland
Bottom line at the top

If you have but $5,000 to spend on a pair of speakers--or, looked at the other way, if you can somehow manage to stretch your new-speaker budget to $5k--and you generally favor a Harbeth/Spendor type of tonal balance, then I think that for now these Stirling Broadcast LS3/6 speakers are IT!

I don't mean to take anything away from the excellence of my Gradient Revolution + SW-T-based system or my Harbeth Monitor 40.1s. But that Gradient speaker system costs $20,000 and the speakers MUST be bi-amplified, usually adding to the cost if you don't happen to have another two channels of spare amplification hanging around gathering dust. That puts it out of reach for many, even many of those here.

And the Harbeths, while they only require two channels of amplification, themselves cost $13,000 or more and are about to be replaced by the yet-more-costly Monitor 40.2. In addition, the M40.1 boxes are BIG, much larger looking than the Stirling boxes and taking a considerably larger footprint. Futher, the Harbeth midbass can overload a lot of rooms, so either careful room matching or electronic equalization may be required.

Many more can afford these, place them with less domestic tranquility problems, and there should not be any bass overload problems in any reasonable listening room.

The Stirlings arrived in perfect condition, at least partially due to the very sturdy boxes they come in. Stirling uses very thick, dense cardboard and even sturdier 1/4" masonite boards to line the inside of the box and that makes the conatainers fairly puncture and dent resistant, it seems. Other than the box and masonite boards, the only packing materials are the poly bag for the speaker and four strofoam corners to keep all sides of the speaker at least a couple of inches away from the box walls; very efficient use of packing materials.

I also bought the Something Solid stands for these. Without the included/optional spikes, they raise the bottom of the speakers about 15.75" off the floor. They are black metal and ring when tapped. Not what I usually think best in speaker stands, but I figured I'd give them a try since these are what are commonly used with Spendors of this same size (like the SP1/2s) and are what Stirling recommends for these. The Something Solid stands proved to be the best stands I had in house for these speakers.

My initial and continuing reaction: Oh, my, these are wonderful!!! REG's review in The Absolute Sound seems right on. To the extent that the Stereophile review is contrary, ignore it; they are just wrong. For one thing, the bass hump-up is a measurment artifact of the way JA measures speaker bass. If the bass doesn't measure that bumped up with his method, the bass in room from the listening position will sound too thin, at least to me and most others who appreciate natural, concert hall tonal balance.

I could stop right there. Read REG's review at http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/stirling-broadcast-ls36/. Read it carefully. I do not disagree with anything he says, except the treble excess. The treble sounds really fine to me. But REG commented later in his forum that later production fixed a problem with the tweeter's specifications, making the treble flatter, so we don't disagree about that, either. I'll just add some personal thoughts and comparisons.

Versus the Spendor SP1/2

The natural point of comparison is the Spendor SP1/2. I definitely agree with the direction of differences REG noted in his review.

I prefer my Stirling LS3/6 to the Spendor SP1/2 samples I owned for awhile. However, I could certainly understand other listeners disagreeing, especially if they never listen above moderate levels and listen primarily to classical music.

Already owning a pair of Stirling LS3/6 speakers, I bought a pair of used Spendor SP1/2 speakers, kept them for a year or two, and later sold them.

First, on the very positive side, I agree that the SP1/2s have at least as good an overall tonal balance as any speaker I've ever heard. The balance is more pleasingly natural on much music, especially classical, than even that of the Stirling. The Spendors are a bit warmer-yet sounding and a bit smoother/more rolled off up top, qualities which suit many commercial recordings--especially classical ones--yet better. The midrange of both speakers was similar, with the Stirlings seeming a bit more immediate/insistent.

However, for me there were aspects of my SP1/2s that were annoying in comparison to the Stirlings.

First, the Stirling bass stays at full level almost an octave lower, down to 40 Hz or so, while the SP1/2s roll off starting around 80 Hz.

Also, the bass the Spendor has is a bit flabby/drummy, at least in the three rooms I tried it in. I never had any such impression about the bass of the Stirlings used in the same rooms in similar positions. Perhaps this bass quality could have been EQed away; I did not try because of the next problem.

My Spendor SP1/2 samples could not play at levels above what I consider quite moderate on a lot of material without a sense of strain starting to creep in. The strain got progressively worse as the level increased until they sounded a bit nasty. If you never listen to anything above 80 dB peaks, the SP1/2 would be just fine, and you would never know anything was amiss. But that's not me. Perhaps my SP1/2s were defective in some way, but both speakers of the pair sounded and measured similarly.

While the Stirlings have a bit less beautifully natural balance, they are still among the best balanced speakers I've heard. The Stirlings will play much louder and always sounds lower in distortion and often yet clearer than the SP1/2s. The Stirlings also have that special sense of dynamic kick that my SP1/2s definitely did not. To me, the Stirlings are the better reproducer, but, as I said, other listeners could well prefer the Spendors for their yet-better-in-my-view overall frequency balance.

Versus the Acoustic Research AR-303a

Compared to the AR-303as which I used for quite awhile in this same living room system where I first had the Stirlings, the Stirlings seem superior in every way except bass extension, bass power, and bass clarity (where the ARs hold definite sway over just about anything of equivalent size) and in terms of SPL, where the two seem about equal. In all other ways, the Stirlings are superior, especially in terms of lacking the bit of high frequency excess and aggression the 303as have (which is lacking in my earlier vintage AR speakers from the 1960s/1970s). The Stirlings also did not excite slap echo which was audible in this room from a few locations with the ARs, perhaps because of the Stirlings' more controlled high frequency dispersion. The ARs are of the "room filler" school, after all, and I had them set up pointing straight ahead (to tame the highs a bit), not toed in, so the ARs naturally elicited more reflections from the painted drywall room walls.

Versus the Harbeth SLH5+

Okay, I don't own the SLH5+ speakers yet. I may never own them. But they are worth investigating further, even though they are priced somewhat higher than the Stirlings at about $6,700.

The SLH5+ is the latest iteration of this size BBC-influenced box speaker and is Harbeth's latest take on this genre. It is thus an more recently released speaker than the Stirling. Like the Stirling and Spendor, it uses an 8" woofer operating over a wide range--up to 3 kHz--before the lower of the two tweeters takes over.

My fairly lengthy audition of them at Axpona 2015 in Chicago leads me to believe that these new Harbeths are very "beautiful" sounding speakers with truly exceptional clarity and openness. The top tweeter is wonderfully integrated, may may be a bit down in subjective level, but that is not a problem at all for most recordings. The bass certainly is not as full or deep sounding as that from the Stirling, but is tighter and more agile. The sound is not nearly as full in the bass or lower mids as either the Stirling or the Harbeth M40.1.

I have a feeling that those who think that the traditional Harbeth house sound is a bit to warm and bassy, will love the SLH5+. From comments made by the designer himself, Alan Shaw, on the Harbeth Users Group, this seems to be the direction he is taking his new models, the SLH5+ and M40.2: more open, yet more beautiful sounding on a wider range of recordings and in a wider range of rooms. Call it a more "modern" sound voiced in response to input/marketing research from Harbeth owners, dealers, and auditioners.

Versus the Harbeth Monitor 40.1

The M40/40.1s are the seemingly logical next step up (and the top step) in a BBC-heritage speaker. Here are my thoughts about how the M40.1 compares to the Stirling:

If your room is as bass friendly to the M40/40.1s as REG's is, those big Harbeth speakers WILL give you deeper bass. And even if your room (like my basement concrete bunker room) doesn't support the low bass that well, the big Harbeths WILL give you a grander sense of scale and more "authority." And those qualities ARE important, especially on large-scale orchestral/choral music. When speakers play the big stuff with this type of grandeur, other speakers will tend to sound at least a bit "small" or "toy-like" by comparison, even if balanced to be rather full sounding as the Stirlings certainly are.

BUT:

· The Stirlings are really about equal to the big Harbeths in terms of clarity and have enough scale and bass to do justice to orchestras.

· For flat-to-20-Hz bass extension at live music levels you will need one or more subwoofers with both the Harbeths and Stirlings in most rooms.

· The Stirlings seemingly are very fuss free. You probably will not "need" EQ. I hear NOTHING significantly amiss response-wise. I cannot emphasize this enough. In this way, they are like my vintage ARs: the more I listen, the more I hear the "rightness" of the balance. Not that Stirlings sound like vintage ARs. Somehow the Stirlings manage to bring up the top two octaves and add tons of clarity and dynamic punch without creating an iota of aggressiveness or backing off too much on the presence range.

· Out of the sweet spot, the Stirlings sound at least as good if not better than the M40.1s. Listened to from way off axis, the Harbeths can sound odd. My vintage AR-3as sound way more natural listened to casually. This is especially true of rooms-away casual listening, where the Stirlings are, well, sterling. From rooms away, the Stirlings distract me with their excellent sound, as if trying to draw me back, and sound very much like live music is going on in the room where they are playing. Part of this is the dynamic punch/bounce/ebb/flow/lilt which is just as evident from far away.

· On audiophile-approved closely miked female vocals (if those matter to you at all), the Stirlings provide a reach-out-and-touch-it intimacy second to none, right up there with the best I've heard. What does matter to most here is that the Harbeths really have nothing on the Stirlings in terms of vocal reproduction generally, and that is one of the big Harbeth's strongest suits.

· If you like soul-stirring playback levels on some material, the Stirlings will play as loud comfortably on big stuff as the M40/40.1s, considerably louder than the SP1/2s.

· Unlike the M40/40.1, the Stirlings have a moment-to-moment dynamic punch, bounce, ebb and flow, and lilt that no Harbeth I've heard has. This, combined with the Stirlings' overall frequency balance, makes them equally satisfying with jazz, pop, and rock, in addition to classical music. The big Harbeths are at their very considerable best with classical music.

· To a degree I've never before experienced with any other speaker, the more I listen to the Stirlings, the more they continually sound "right" in new, exciting, and satisfying ways. Whatever limitations they have (e.g., bottom bass, grand scale, "authority") become less and less, not more and more, important as time goes on.

· And look at the price difference. You could outfit a surround system with the Stirlings for the price of a pair of M40.1s!

Other Comments

One thing REG's review did not address is the proper listening height for these. With the speakers on the 15.75" tall Something Solid stands, things sound just right when my ears are about 36" above the floor. As with prior BBC-derived speakers of this size and design, that means that your ears should be even with the lower, larger tweeter.

The dynamic punch REG notes is very real, both in terms of actual punch and in terms of accenting the rhythms, ebbs and flows, and lilt of music. These are unrestrained in a quite fun way without being aggressive in the slightest. Those whose musical diet includes a lot of music that relies on jumpin' rhythms and percussion may find this quality to be the trump card separating the listening experience from what you get with other fine speakers like the Harbeths. But even with classical music, this dynamic punch is intoxicating. No, the Stirlings don't "do dynamics" the way Klipschorns do. But then they don't subjectively pump up the dynamics by adding brightness, aggression, grunge, grit, or brittleness either.

The rosewood finish: Some folks have said online that they don't care for it, saying it's too dark. Well, yes it's dark, but actually is lighter than the rosewood finish on my AR-303as. I find the overall look of the grain, luster of the finish, and more reddish color to be superior to how the ARs look. I would say that this rosewood is fully comparable in looks to the Legacy Audio Whispers which I had in rosewood. No, the Stirling rosewood is not up to the standard of the Cello Strads I had in rosewood, but then few speakers are finished as nicely as the Cellos were in terms of rich deep luster and interesting wood grain. I think the Stirlings look very nice in rosewood, in other words. Many people seem to want a lighter finish and the cherry finish is $500 less and IS much lighter, at least to start. Natural cherry gets considerably darker and redder with months and years of exposure to sunlight, however.

Even if you prefer the bit-smoother-on-high-strings, bit warmer version of reality conveyed by the Spendor SP1/2s, those speakers are long out of production and the originals rarely appear on the used market these days. So, for most folks, the SP1/2 is made of unobtainium, while the Stirling is easily available new and VERY reasonably priced for what you get.

Great speakers indeed, and not just great for the money!
 
  • Like
Reactions: chet atkins

mauidan

Member Sponsor
Aug 2, 2010
1,512
11
36
Pukalani, HI
Would you have purchased these speakers if REG hadn't recommended them?

BTW, another REG review with no measurements and no list of associated equipment.
 

tmallin

WBF Technical Expert
May 19, 2010
962
374
1,625
71
Chicagoland
Would you have purchased these speakers if REG hadn't recommended them?

BTW, another REG review with no measurements and no list of associated equipment.

Dan, I make no secret of the fact that I agree with many of REG's reviewing conclusions and have purchased a number of items based on his reviews. Long term, I've found that he and I agree to a close degree on the type of tonal balance speakers should have. These days it's hard to find speakers, which have the type of tonal balance he and I favor. Atkinson of Stereophile tends to think speakers like the Harbeths and Stirlings are too bass heavy and warm above that. I agree with REG that speakers which measure bass heavy using JA's near-field bass measurement technique sound naturally weighted on commercial material in a good room.

Compare, for example, Stereophile's bass measurements of the Stirling and the SLH5+. The difference is apparent. Both are a bit up in the lower ranges, but the Stirling is more so. While REG has not yet formally reviewed the Harbeth SLH5+, he has commented rather extensively about their sound on his forum and my audition of these speakers at Axpona agreed right down the line with his assessment. The Stirling, we both believe, has the more natural low-end weight.

That is not to say that REG and I always agree. If you were to follow the discussions on REG's forum, you will see that he takes me to task more than anyone else there for saying things he disagrees with. And I definitely have not always agreed on his assessments of the overall merit of products. Just for one example, REG found nothing much to dislike about the DSPeaker Dual Core Antimode 2.0, while I found its sonics (without the extra-cost add on power supply)and added noise (in any version) quite annoying in my system.

It's very helpful to find at least one professional reviewer with whom you usually agree. Otherwise, you can make many more purchasing "mistakes."

As to the lack of measurements in REG's reviews, very few TAS reviews by any reviewer contain measurements. The only recent exceptions I'm aware of are a few by Jon Valin. REG has said that TAS is reluctant to publish measurements. REG sometimes publishes his measurements on his own site or his own forum.
 

mauidan

Member Sponsor
Aug 2, 2010
1,512
11
36
Pukalani, HI
Tom,

I was just looking for a simple yes or no answer, but thanks for taking the time to reply.

When I was a member of REG's forum (he kicked me off a decade ago), he stressed the importance of measurements and often discussed JA's measurements, yet he never includes them in his reviews.

He's the only reviewer I know of that doesn't list his associated equipment at the end of his reviews.

I once made the mistake of buying speakers, which he gave a rave review without hearing them (no dealer in HI).

Luckly, I got at big discount, so I didn't lose any money when I sold them.
 

tmallin

WBF Technical Expert
May 19, 2010
962
374
1,625
71
Chicagoland
If you haven't yet seen page 66 of the September 2015 issue of The Absolute Sound, take a look. It contains Robert Green's (REG's) capsule views on the Stirling LS3/6 speakers, the AudioKinesis Swarm, and the Carver ALS speakers. Definitely the best page of the issue.

I've really liked the sound of the Stirling LS3/6 speakers in my prior set ups, but their sound in my latest set up is considerably beyond what I'd previously achieved with these speakers. REG's capsule review in the September TAS seems right on to me.

I now have my Stirlings fully set up in my upstairs stereo room. The results are so satisfying that I have now parted with my vintage AR and KLH speakers to make room for an AudioKinesis Swarm subwoofer array. As REG has said, time marches on where speaker excellence is concerned. The bottom octave is really all that's missing, and if I hadn't ever heard that bottom octave in a system, I would not know it was missing. I will be taking delivery of the Swarm sometime after Christmas 2015.

This is actually the first time I've managed to set up a system to simultaneously (1) portray recorded space well, (2) have the speakers close enough to the walls beside and behind them to reinforce bass a bit, and (3) also place the speakers to cope with the Allison Effect quite well. Here are the "specs" for this set up:

Room: 161" long, 132" wide, 103" high; plaster walls and ceiling, wood floor
Power: two dedicated 20-amp circuits, one for amp, the other for sources
Speakers: Stirling LS3/6, Rosewood
Amp: Lyngdorf TDAI-2170 integrated amp
Sources: EVS modified Oppo BDP-105, Logitech Squeezebox Touch, Bluesound Node (for Tidal)
Wires: Absolute Power Cords, DNM speaker cables with HFTNs, Belkin Gold USB cable (Touch to Lyngdorf), Blue Jeans HDMI and digital coax (Oppo to Lyngdorf), Blue Jeans toslink (Bluesound to Lyngdorf),
Tweaks: EVS Ground Enhancers on every component, Bright Star products for vibration control, all connections treated with Caig Deoxit Gold G100L (the brush-on liquid)
Speaker orientation: firing into long dimension of the room
Listening position: centered between the side walls, 61" from each side wall, 84.25" from the wall behind the speakers, and 34.25" above the floor (chair with seat cushion removed to get it that low)
Speaker stands: Something Solid XF Mk II sized for the Stirlings, 15 7/8" high (which includes the 1/8" felt pads under the stands; no spikes)
Speaker position: woofer center is 27.375" from the floor; top front center of cabinet is 22" from nearest side wall and 34" from wall behind the speakers. The product of the 22" and 34" dimensions is roughly equal to the square of the 27.375" dimension to deal with the Allison Effect.
Speaker toe in: left speaker aimed at left ear, right speaker aimed at right ear as viewed from listening position
Distance between speaker centers as toed in: 88"
Distance from speaker plane to listening position: 50"
Subtended angle between speakers at listening position: computed to be about 83 degrees between speaker centers as toed in
Acoustical treatment: Thick oriental rug and pad, plus Sonex batts (4" thick, 2 feet by 4 feet each) at first reflection points of speakers on side walls, floor, and wall behind the listening position as viewed from listening position
RoomPerfect implementation: 100% room knowledge with all measurements taken at listening position; the Lyngdorf shows a 10% correction

RoomPerfect adds a bit of warmth and fullness, while clarifying the bass yet further. It also enhances the spatiousness of the stage in all dimensions and solidifies the imaging yet further.

I continue to be very impressed with the Lyngdorf amp. These speakers never sounded so clear and clean before and the background noise is nonexistent--blackground indeed. There is plenty of power to push these speakers to as loud as I'd ever want to listen with not the slightest sign of audible strain at all. Keep in mind that this is a small room and that I listen close up, but counterbalancing that is that I think I like to listen at higher SPLs than a lot of people.

Tonal balance with RoomPerfect set to Neutral or even Bypass is just the way I like it, sounding very concert-hall realistic/natural to me. Yes, the sound is a bit warmer with RoomPerfect on, but either way the tonal balance is entirely plausible. This is a far cry from most speakers.

The mids and highs sound very realistic, clean, and otherwise Harbeth-like. The Stirlings are again displaying that extra dynamic punch or bounce which distinguish their sound from others, including the Harbeths.

The bass with this speaker positioning is quite even sounding on moving string bass lines even without RoomPerfect engaged. With it engaged, it seems truly even tempered. Bass drums do not lack for power and punch and definition of the drum heads is excellent. Organ and kettle drum shudder is a bit lacking, but that's to be expected from any speakers not covering the very bottom octave.

The spatial presentation is excellent with the sound on good recordings nicely detached from the real speaker positions. Imaging is sharp, and the stage is big in all dimensions with a nice feeling of envelopment. Sure, the scale of the presentation could be grander and more authoritative yet, but that's where the extra cost of M40s can be heard, and is where line sources like the Carvers excel. And, yes, the depth of stage could be deeper yet if the speakers were further away from the back wall, but I have a feeling the lower octaves would then suffer and this amount of depth is just fine and is actually more depth than one usually hears from a mid-hall concert perspective.

One tricky part to get this level of excellence was getting the speakers toed in just right for the best spatial presentation. This required aiming the speakers precisely at their respective ears. The little 2"-diameter mirrors I use on the big Harbeths to see the reflections of my ears when the mirrors are placed on the speaker baffles did not work because there is not enough flat space near the LS3/6 tweeters to mount the mirrors flat on the baffle. Driver mounting screws were in the way of the mirror; I'd need 1" mirrors. I managed to get excellent results, however, by carefully attaching the mirrors to the grill cloth centered near the lower tweeter position.

Like the M40.1 (and presumably the M40.2), the Harbeth SLH5+, in my audition at Axpona in April 2015, is a very beautiful sounding speaker. Seydor also calls it that, admitting that it sacrifices just a bit of reality in favor of greater beauty over a wide range of recordings, making it one of his desert-island speakers. It is a more forgiving speaker than the Stirling LS3/6, I think.

You have to decide what kind of sound is just right for you. If you lean more toward wanting to hear maximal beauty from the widest range of recordings, then the SLH5+ may be just the ticket. If you still want an easy-to-listen-to, but basically more honest reproducer of the sound of acoustic instruments as recorded, then the LS3/6 may be more to your taste. Both are quite wonderful to listen to and more natural in balance than most other speakers. One is just a bit more rose colored than the other. I might eventually own both, who knows?

If you can't afford the M40.1 or find the old M40, the Stirling LS3/6 is at least the next best thing. Even with the addition of a Swarm, it will still cost much less than the M40.1, much less the new M40.2.

I urge caution to anyone looking to buy the Spendor SP1/2s these days. The LS3/6 is the modern descendant of these classic Spendor speakers. The pair of SP1/2s I owned for about a year a couple of years back had problems. It could be that some of the component parts have not aged well in all samples.

One of the speakers in my pair rolled off several more dB in the top octave than the other. Both speakers had trouble playing big music at levels above quite moderate without a sense of strain starting to creep in. The bass cut off abruptly below 80 Hz and was a bit too warm and drummy/one-note. I did try the DOT 3 brake fluid treatment trick on the woofer surrounds, but it did not seem to make any difference in my pair.

Yes, my SP1/2s gave me some of the best massed violin sound I've heard in terms of balance and clarity. But, in the end, I preferred the LS3/6. The Spendor was just a bit too warm and too polite for my "modern" sensibilities, and I'm less tolerant of brightness in speakers than most these days.

So, unless you really can't afford the Stirling LS3/6, I think that current Stirling LS3/6 speaker is a better bet than a pair of used Spendor SP 1/2s. The LS3/6 will give you an octave more bass extension, tremendous "heart" in terms of its ability to play without seeming restraint any kind of music at whatever SPL you might like below "headbanger," wonderful clarity and naturalness on acoustic instruments and voices, and that very special extra dynamic kick/punch audible on all music at all volumes compared to most any other speakers.

I'm ever-more impressed by and committed to this system in my upstairs stereo room. Every time I enter the room and unmute the Lyngdorf TDAI-2170, even with RoomPerfect bypassed, I am instantly struck by how "right" these speakers in this system sound, even on whatever familiar or unfamiliar material happens to be streaming at the time. When I get into the hot seat (no small feat given the Sonex pads on the floor and the low sitting position), I am taken further and further aback as I hear the focus and frequency balance gel further. With a familiar CD or Tidal streaming something familiar, the sense of real music is striking indeed from the sweet spot. Clicking in RoomPerfect adds scrumptious chocolate syrup and a cherry on top to the sonic sundae.

A few weeks ago I passed on to new owners my vintage AR-3a, AR-5 and KLH Model 12 speakers as well as my Arcam AVR600 (about which Peter Moncrieff of IAR once said: "The new Arcam AVR 600, at the hub of my lab's reference system, gives me the finest sound I have heard in my life, from any system. Ever. Anywhere. Regardless of price. Period."), Oppo BDP 95, and six wooden stool/speaker stands which were taking up space in this room and its closet. This LS3/6 - Lyngdorf system is the one for this small room.

After removing the extra speakers and stands from the back of the room, I added Sonex batts behind the listening position. This nicely solidified the images at center stage and breaks the sound free from the speakers a bit more all across the stage. Nice effect.

As to the coming Swarm subwoofer system, I ordered the two-amps version so I can run the four subs in stereo and perhaps in phase quadrature. The amps used are external, not inside the subs. The amp in question is this one:

https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-sa1000-subwoofer-amplifier-rack-mountable--300-811

The amp might be something designed at least in part by Bob Carver, given one of the comments on that Web page and the use of "patented tracking down converter power supply for high efficiency" in the manufacturer's description.

Removing the six extra speakers and stands from the rear of my small upstairs stereo room and adding the Sonex batts back there changed the sound a bit in this room. The Stirling LS3/6s still sounded Tony-the-Tiger "Grrrreat!," but the bass response and perhaps other parts of the response changed enough in the sweet spot that the system then sounded best with the old RoomPerfect settings bypassed. I ran new RoomPerfect measurements and correction and now the system again sounds yet-better with RoomPerfect engaged.







 

tmallin

WBF Technical Expert
May 19, 2010
962
374
1,625
71
Chicagoland
More on the proper set up for the Stirling LS3/6 speakers on their dedicated Something Solid XF MkII stands which are about 15.75 tall:

The best sound I've been able to achieve after much more than a year with these speakers in this room aims the speakers directly at their respective ears and tilts them back so that the lower tweeter is aimed directly at my ears.

As far as the positions of the speakers and listener in the room, I've found the Rule of Thirds (29% version) to be by far the best sounding solution, one which eliminates the need for any electronic equalization of the Stirlings when used either alone or with the AudioKinesis Swarm subwoofers. Plug 132 inches into that linked calculator for the main wall and 161 inches for the side wall, and you can then see how I have arranged the Stirlings and the listening position. For these measurements, I use the top front center of the Stirling baffle as the reference point for the speaker position and my ear canal as the reference point for the listening position.

One "problem" with setting up the Stirlings for their best sound is that you should listen with your ears no higher than on axis with the lower (physically and frequency-wise) tweeter. If you listen higher, the treble gets too strong. The center of that lower tweeter when the speakers are on their dedicated stands is only about 33.5 inches above the floor. That is lower than my ears are in any comfortable chair. Thus, for my typical listening height of 37 to 38 inches above the floor (depends on how much I slouch), I need to tilt the speakers back a bit to aim the lower tweeter at my ears.

For my fairly close-up listening distance of 55.4 inches from speaker baffle to ear canal, geometric computations and listening tests resulted in my placing four heavy duty felt pads under the front legs of each stand, with no felt pads under the rear legs. Each felt pad is specified to be 0.188 inches thick. Thus, four would be about 3/4 inch thick. The necessary amount of lift under the front feet would vary with listening distance and listening height.

Getting the toe-in and tilt back correct produces both measurably and audibly smoother high frequencies. With this positioning I have found that no electronic equalization whatsoever is needed to get what sounds to me like natural sound from the Stirling LS3/6 in this room. The speakers sound quite smooth and natural from 40 Hz to the upper limits of my hearing when so arranged.
 
Last edited:

Genesis56

New Member
Apr 7, 2015
13
0
1
Hi Tom.

Your review of the LS3/6 is a great read. A few weeks ago I purchased a pair of Stirling LS3/6 speakers in the new English Oak finish along with a pair of the Something Solid stands. My decision to purchase was based on forum comments (including your write-up) and subsequent discussions with Doug Stirling. My experience with these speakers is essentially similar to yours. Although I have to admit, straight out of the box they were underwhelming. During the last two or three weeks I have become a convert. The top to bottom coherency is stunning. I did not expect the LS3/6 speakers to outdo the sound staging of my Magnepan 3.7i speakers. The detail retrieval is very impressive. I don't quite know how Stirling performs this miracle without resorting to excessive brightness. I can hear deep into the mix - it's almost like being in the recording studio. Listening to these speakers brings back memories of my first job out of school as an assistant inside a recording studio.

I can highly recommend these speakers.
 

Genesis56

New Member
Apr 7, 2015
13
0
1
Incidentally, I have a BK Electronics Monolith Plus subwoofer which I bought from the United Kingdom. BK used to make the earlier REL subwoofers before REL moved their manufacturing to China. I placed this subwoofer next to the left hand LS3/6 which is set about two and a half feet from the wall. The subwoofer crossover is set at 40Hz with the output level just a smidge over where you nearly can't hear it on most popular recordings. The addition of this sub has turned the LS3/6 speakers into a true full range system. The subtle extreme low bass evident on some really good recordings just seeps into my listening room and it's a tribute to the superb engineering of the Stirling's that they can match so well with a quality subwoofer.

My amplifier is a Rega Elex-r which is rated at 72 watts per channel into 8 ohms. It has no trouble driving the Stirlings to quite high levels in my 20 foot by 15 foot room.
 

shakti

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2015
1,433
2,374
480
Cologne, Germany
Just had a read to this thread, thank you for all the information regarding the old BBC LS 3/6 Design.

I am currently collecting information about these speakers, as Derek Hughs (who has developed the Sterling LS 3/6) has done the next step to the LS 3/6 Design, being responsible for the Graham LS 8/1 speakers.
I have the Graham on the way to my home and I am very happy about it. I spent many years with the Spendor SP1 speakers and I am very interested to hear the latest sibling :)

 
  • Like
Reactions: dan31

Heinz R.

New Member
Feb 28, 2022
1
1
3
Cologne, Germany
Just had a read to this thread, thank you for all the information regarding the old BBC LS 3/6 Design.

I am currently collecting information about these speakers, as Derek Hughs (who has developed the Sterling LS 3/6) has done the next step to the LS 3/6 Design, being responsible for the Graham LS 8/1 speakers.
I have the Graham on the way to my home and I am very happy about it. I spent many years with the Spendor SP1 speakers and I am very interested to hear the latest sibling :)

I am new to this forum, I enjoy my Stirling Broadcast LS 3/6 since late 2016 and there is nothing to complain. If I want more dynamics I switch to my Klipsch Jubilee, but otherwise the SB LS 3/6 are one of the great compromises the word of speakers has seen.
Just share your thoughts as soon as you had a serious listen to your new Graham Audio speakers!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: drrsutliff

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing