T-1030 vs. VR 40

[nosubs]

Are there any enthusiasts who have heard both these highly reputed models? Recently both were available on eBay for $500. The VR 40s needed re-foaming, the T-1030s had already been done. I understand the newer speakers had better cabinet bracing; but they are bass reflex. I love the sound of my acoustic T-830s. Newer driver designs on the VRs also. I was wondering how it all balances out; although the T-1030s have already sold, so it's academic.

[nosubs]

Well, it is NOT academic any longer. The T-1030's are relisted and the VR 40's have been converted to auction. I'd really like to hear some input. Steve? Gerry? Anyone?

[Steve F]

When I arrived at BA (1992) the 1030 was the top of the current line and development of the VRs started in 1993. They were introduced in the fall of 1994.

No one had any complaints with the actual sound and performance of the 1030, but it was a blocky, ugly speaker, with no visual style or grace whatsoever. The trend at the time was to go slightly smaller, be really sleek and stylish and maintain an absolutely unimpeachable acoustic performance.

Gerry was the lead engineer on the 1030 and was responsible for its voicing. By the time we did the VR series, another engineer had joined the staff (Dave Fokos) and he did the VR and CR lines. Gerry turned his attention to the best-selling Subsat 6 and Sub Sat 7 sub/satellite systems, along with their companion center channel speakers, the CS6 and CS7. If I remember correctly, Gerry also did BA’s first THX-approved speakers, the 555 LCRs, 575 surround and 595 subwoofer. And all of BA’s truly excellent in-wall speakers

 

Anyway, the VR40 ended up being a truly great speaker. I’ve been in this business for many decades and been associated with some truly great speakers, and the VR40 is near the very top of that list. Sleek, trim, great-looking, it was a dual 7” woofer 3-way system with a 5 ¼” mid and BA’s superb aluminum VR tweeter with AMD. The real walnut veneer cab was quite nice as well. That speaker was ruler flat on-axis from around 40-45Hz-20kHz, with good dispersion. It had a 1”-thick baffle and by-pass caps in the x-over. Bi-ampable. Carpet spikes. Quite sophisticated. Very musical and not harsh at all, in spite of the clichéd reputation that metal domes have.

I liked them so much that I got a pair for my dad to replace some older ARs that he had.

I am very surprised to hear that the pair you are looking at had their surrounds “re-foamed.” The VR woofers had butyl rubber surrounds, not foam. They would never need to be replaced, unless they were mechanically torn or suffered some other misfortune. They were not susceptible to ‘foam rot,’ since they were not foam. Same with the midrange.

Comparing the T1030 directly to the VR40, I would characterize the 1030 as being slightly “gutsier” and the 40 as being slightly more “refined.” Both terrific speakers, just a slightly different approach.

Steve F.

[nosubs]

Thanks, Steve. Reassuring to know you are still there for us with great first hand testimony. The 1030s have been re-foamed. The VR 40s need to have the rubber surrounds replaced on the lower woofers. Pictures show almost the exact same damage on R & L of matched units and some damage to the screens, so it was probably a storage issue. Now I have to decide....

[bdejonge]

I know this is an old topic but if anyone is interested I have a pair of VR40's I'm looking to sell along with a VR12 Center and Mirage BPS150i Sub.  If anyone interested please let me know.

[Zboski]

How much for the vr40s?

[Pete B]

On 7/20/2016 at 4:08 PM, Steve F said:

When I arrived at BA (1992) the 1030 was the top of the current line and development of the VRs started in 1993.

Snip ....

Anyway, the VR40 ended up being a truly great speaker. I’ve been in this business for many decades and been associated with some truly great speakers, and the VR40 is near the very top of that list.

Steve F.

Mind if I ask Steve, what speaker was at the top of the list that you were associated with?

[Steve F]

I'd say the VR40 was no. 4.

IMO, the top speaker I conceived, championed and voiced was the BA VR-M90, a dual 6 1/2-inch 3-way floorstander. It had an amazing 3 1/2-inch midrange and the unmatched BA aluminum VR tweeter. I always liked the AR ADD/Vertical voicing and the BA project engineer on the 90 was a far-field power response guy a la Roy Allison, so the voicing was similar to the AR11 and 91. Great speaker. We never did a color spec sheet on it, but here is a scale line drawing of the VR-M80 and 90. I can probably dig up more info if you're interested.

Nos. 2 and 3 were Atlantic Technology speakers. The IWTS-30LCR was unquestionably the best in-wall speaker I've ever heard, by a country mile. I pretty much copied the VR-M90's mid for the 30LCR and we used two, so PH was unlimited and distortion was nil. It received THX's highest cert, Ultra 2. FR was ruler flat from 55-20. The tweet/mid module rotated 90 degrees, so you could maintain a correct vertical MTM whether the speaker itself was H or V.

The AT-1 with its remarkable H-PAS bass alignment rounds out my top 3. If H-PAS had been invented and introduced in 1975 instead of 2010, it would have revolutionized the entire industry. The AT-1 with dual 5 1/4-in woofers went legitimately to 29 Hz. No BS. They flapped your pant legs. Its low-rez 1 1/8-in silk dome was about the smoothest tweeter I've ever heard and it could cross over at 2kHz and not break a sweat. Stereophile put the AT-1 on their Recommended Components list--category B, up to $20,000/pr--for 3 years running. The AT-1's were $2500/pr in a very expensive cabinet finish. We could have stripped down the cab and the extras and come in at $1500 for the same performance. But in 2010, from a small company with very little visibility, the industry yawned. (PS--the 'e' dropped off of "cliche" when I converted the AT-1 lit from pdf to jpg. Who knows.)

I've attached some pics. They were great speakers, all.

[Steve F]

Here's an ad for the AT-1, showing three different FR's from three different magazines.

Steve F.

[amanteyzapata]

Hi Steve,

 I know this is an old thread but I really appreciate your advice on all things vintage!  I just acquired some VR 40 speakers and was wondering if there is any advice for recapping them?  Thanks, -Joseph 

[Bassman999]

Can you tell me the crossover frequencies in the VR40s?

I'm trying to build a pair from spare parts on the internet.

[bensm1th]

Hi everyone,

I just got a pair of Boston VR40s from Goodwill. I also got the Boston VR500. I don't think my receiver can handle them. I am extremely new to speakers in general, but the VR40s make my 100 watt receiver turn off. How many watts are required to drive them?

 

Also, looking to sell if I find the right buyer. 

[Bassman999]

6 hours ago, bensm1th said:

Hi everyone,

I just got a pair of Boston VR40s from Goodwill. I also got the Boston VR500. I don't think my receiver can handle them. I am extremely new to speakers in general, but the VR40s make my 100 watt receiver turn off. How many watts are required to drive them?

 

Also, looking to sell if I find the right buyer. 

There's quite a few receivers out there that won't play speakers that are under 8ohm impedance.

My guess is your receiver does like the impedance load from the vr40.

I'm not sure if the vr40 is a 6 ohm or 4 ohm speaker but a lot of higher end speakers have a lower impedance.

Where are you located?

 

[Steve F]

I was at BA when the VR towers were done. In fact, I was in charge of the project. The VR40's impedance in the heart of the midrange was around 2.7 ohms. Two 8-ohm woofers paralleled (4 ohms) crossing over to a 4-ohm midrange unit. Add in a little resistance for the crossover and the Ω sweep was around 2.7 at 500Hz. Good luck to your average AV cheapo receiver. Not a chance in a million above the most modest of volumes. We called it "8 ohms." Everyone did that kind of thing.

But with a good amp, the VR40 was one heck of a terrific speaker. For smoothness and uncolored musical accuracy, I'd put it up against anything three times its price.

The crossovers were 400 and 3300Hz.

[Les C.]

Posted Friday at 02:27 PM

I was at BA when the VR towers were done. In fact, I was in charge of the project. The VR40's impedance in the heart of the midrange was around 2.7 ohms. Two 8-ohm woofers paralleled (4 ohms) crossing over to a 4-ohm midrange unit. Add in a little resistance for the crossover and the Ω sweep was around 2.7 at 500Hz. Good luck to your average AV cheapo receiver. Not a chance in a million above the most modest of volumes. We called it "8 ohms." Everyone did that kind of thing.

But with a good amp, the VR40 was one heck of a terrific speaker. For smoothness and uncolored musical accuracy, I'd put it up against anything three times its price. The crossovers were 400 and 3300Hz.

Question: From L. Currey

I have an opportunity to pick up two VR40 and a VR12 for $600 in excellent condition.  They were purchased new in 1998 (one owner).  My concern is that I’ll be running these through either a Onyko RZ820 (130W per channel) OR a Denon 3600H (105W per channel).  
 

1st Question, will my A/V receivers handle these VR40’s?  2nd Question, I am currently using Aperion Intimus tower and center speakers. Will I notice a much difference in sound quality if I swap them out with the VR40 and VR12.  Thank you, I sincerely appreciate your advice.   

[Steve F]

Those are good receivers. I suspect you'll be fine.

Will you be using a subwoofer? One thing to remember (and people forget this all the time) is if you are using a sub in a home theater system, it is the sub that is handling the demanding low-frequency information. You'll probably be high-passing the VR40's and VR12 at 80Hz or so, and in that region, your receiver will not be asked to put out the high current that a full-range signal (20-20k) would demand. We never had any issues with VR40's + VR12 in a good system with good equipment.

As to how the 40's compare to the Aperions, I've never heard them, so I can't comment. The 40 + 12 combo is quite excellent, however.

 

Steve F.

[Les C.]

Thanks Steve for taking the time to respond to my above question, much appreciated.  I was wondering if $600 was a fair price for the two VR40’s and the one 12 that I was looking at buying?  Thanks for your help on this.  

[Steve F]

Answering the "what is a fair price" question is always difficult. If you really wanted something, it was difficult to find and you found it in good shape, then whatever it was is worth almost any price, right?

If I remember, the VR40's were $1400/pair and the VR12 was $400. So that's $1800 new "list." BA wasn't really discounted very much and generally was not available at the time via mail-order for cheaper pricing. So as a regular retail customer buying these speakers new through an authorized BA dealer, you could expect to pay the full $1800.

$600 strikes me as a reasonable price, especially if they are in good shape, no major cabinet scratches or torn grille cloth. They are really nice speakers.

BTW, the VR12 was the industry's very first 3-way center channel speaker with a vertically-aligned mid and tweeter. I was proud of that one.

Steve F.

[Scott S]

I recently purchased a pair of Boston Acoustics VR40 and a pair of CR9s that look to be in excellent condition. I pick them up next week.

I have Yamaha CR -820 receiver 55 watts per channel and a Yamaha CA-1000 integrated amp at 90 watts. Both from mid 70s.

Would these pair up well?? Any thoughts???

[DanC]

Even though this is an old thread, Steve's description inspired me and I would like to share my perspective and story about the Lynnfield VR40, VR12, and VRS pro surrounds.

I was a retail manager in a large appliance electronics store In the mid to late nineties.

As an audio manager, and car audio enthusiast , I had the privilege of listening to many speakers in my day. Everything from infinity Kappa, Wharfdale, Klipsch, just to name just a few. 

As I was seeking to purchase my own set of speakers, I could not move past the Boston VR 40's. Every time I compared them to other speakers in the showroom, they had the finest detail, truest response, smooth bass and tremendous power handling capabilities.

I bought a set in 1997 And still have them to this day. Every time I look at another set or listen to other speakers I have not been able to part ways with these, in fact, they were playing just as good as the day I bought them this evening while Listening to music that was 24 Bit at a 192 K. I have been impressed we these speakers for over 25 years and still going. 

I current have them playing through A Rotel RSP1576MKII and a Meridian G55 Amplifier. Photo attached 

I have the VR40s bi-amped and would like to know the cutoff for the LF 7" drivers. I currently have them set to 100 HZ at a 24 db slope through the Rotel. Curious if that should be moved up or down. 

I know the midrange crossover is set to 400, but not sure what the bottom end rolloff is for the midrange. 

Any insight here would be appreciated.

Best,

Dan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Steve F]

Dan C -- I got my dad a set of VR-40's in 1997, a few years before I left BA in 2003. Dad was a true audiophile and he loved them. Dad died very unexpectedly in 1998 and I gave the speakers to my older cousin, also a huge audiophile and ardent jazz musician (tenor sax) like myself (drums). My cousin just replaced them last year (2022) after 24 years. He loved them, but his wife didn't want floorstanding speakers any more.

The midrange is in its own internal chamber and really doesn't go much lower than about 350Hz because of the restricted air volume in its internal chamber. If you have the woofers low-passed at 100Hz by the Rotel's setting, you're going to have a response gap between 100-400Hz.

IMO, bi-amping and bi-wiring is snake-oil, if you still have to go through the speaker's internal crossover (which you do). Only if you can access the drivers directly and independently and use an active external crossover are you really "bi" or "tri"-amping your speakers.

Just drive them full-range with your good electronics and don't let your mind "trick" yourself into hearing things that aren't real.