fedeleluigi

Thank you Liangshan, Did you do these videos? If not, I'm not sure about their trustworthiness and how much they can be accurate . Anyway, comparing the videos the sound seem very similar between Ar3 and 3a with only subtle differences. Hoewever, I do think that a youtube video cannot allow to understand the real sonic differences between two loudspeakers. I do hope also Tom Tyson, that is very expert and competent about these excelent loudspeakers, will write about the differences in the midrange between AR3 and 3a in general and also relating to my initial question. I think he could compare AR3 and 3a when they were new and he has some of them in a perfect or almost perfect state. Thank you Luigi

I'd like to clarify that I absolutely don't want to trigger a war between AR3 vs AR3a supporters. Even if the reviews I read about AR3 vs AR3a conclude that AR3a was better than AR3, I do think that it is entirely a matter of personal taste, so one could prefer AR3 to Ar3a and viceversa. What I would really like to know, as an AR enthusiastic, is if the "weak", recessed midrange band of the AR3s (by comparison with AR3a's) I've listened to is normal or not. Roy C experiences with AR3 midrange issues and the AR3 flat frequency responces recently posted by Tom Tyson reinforce my thought that I probably listened to some AR3s with their midrange not perfectly working. Thanks Luigi

Thank you ar-pro, I had already read the review you have posted as well as Julian Hirsh's AR3 review. The probem is that the review you posted says that AR3 lower midrange was criticized to be emphasized while, on the contrary, I have listen to a low output midrange (for example, human voices were much more smaller than I am used to listen to not only with my 3as but also with other loudspeakers). Moreover, Villchur, in one of his very interesting AES interview said (if I have understood everything precisely as English is not my native language): "The most important element of a speaker performance, that, I think, really counts, although perhaps not the only element, it's the amount of power projected into the room and if the power in the bass, mid-range and treble is right, is balanced, it's going to sound good...etc" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6vI1V_TChk Hirsch's review says that the differences between AR3 and AR3a "were not hearth shaking". After reading AR3 reviews and listening to Villchur's interview I have thought that the AR3 midrange drivers I listened to could have some issue but, as it has been the first time I listened to AR3s, I'd like to know from people who could/can compare perfect AR3 and AR3a if a "low output" midrange was a normal AR3 characteristic. As said, english is not my native language so I'd like to know from all of you what the reviewer means saying: " AR3a sounds less DRY than Ar3" as reported in the AR3 review posted by ar-pro. I could not understand what "DRY" means in the context of sound and if it is something negative or positive. From the context I'd say that "DRY" is something negative but I'm not sure. Thanks again for all the comments Luigi

Thank you everybody for all the comments. Genek, as you could compare AR3 and 3a when they were new, your comment is very important for me. In fact, although I have listened to AR3 in different listening conditions in comparison with my 3a's, the differences in the midrange were not subtle but too big, at least to my ears, to depend exclusively on different room and electronics. So the differences in the mid-range band I listened to could depend on a AR3 midrange issue as Roy Champagne has told us. I hope that also someone else, who could compare AR3 and AR3a when they were new or nowadays if they are in a perfect state of functioning, will write his opinion about the sound differences especially in the mid-range band. Luigi

Hello everybody What was the difference about sound between AR 3 and AR 3a (especially in mid-range band reproduction) when they were new (or, nowadays, when they are in a perfect state of functioning)? I'm asking this question, because, for the first time in my life, I have listened to a pair of AR3s and I have noticed that the speaker balance of bass, mid-range and treble is different in comparison to AR 3a's. Listening to AR3, the sound pressure level of mid- range band was not so "powerful" as AR 3a's, so, for example, human voices were smaller than AR3a's and also details and nuances in mid-range band were not so accurate as AR3a's. In AR 3, even if almost all the fundamentals of human voices are reproduced by the woofer, the 1000Hz first order crossover, cause a wide overlap between woofer and midrange, exactly around 1000Hz. So, either a defective midrange or woofer could cause less sound pressure level in the mid-range band and affect human voice reproduction. I have thought about defective drivers because I've never read in old audio magazines about a difference in balance of bass, mid-range and treble between AR 3 and AR3a, but the old reviews examined perfect and new speakers. So I'm wondering if the difference in balance I have listened to is normal or could be caused by some problem of AR3 drivers although there was no distortion (or other issues) in those AR3s sound. I will appreciate any information about this question. Thanks Luigi

RIP Roy... Thanks for everything you did for us. God bless you!