Jump to content
The Classic Speaker Pages Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About d-rok

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

3,092 profile views
  1. I now have all the original drivers in and have had both M-1.0t amps recapped and MKII opt.2 upgraded (585wpc/4ohm)...WOW !!!! IMO not only is the AR9 the Best sounding AR in the pack, they're about the best overall speaker I've ever had the pleasure of owning.
  2. Mike: he no longer has these. I purchased them from him 2 months ago.
  3. THANKS for the suggestion of other models. I will note the AR-92, 91 and 98lsi's. IF I could "go big" I would simply go with another pair of AR9's.......wouldn't THAT sound sweet !!!
  4. I knew when I bought mine recently that all the woofers, lower mid drivers and 1 tweeter were replacements from AB Tech. I NOW know that there is simply NO comparison with the original woofers, lower mids and tweeters....NIGHT AND DAY IMPROVEMENT with all original drivers. Biamping these puppies with 2 MK II opt.2 upgraded Carver M1.0t amps REALLY lets 'em "open up and SING"......of course, throwing 1100+wpc to most any speaker that can "handle" that much power has a tendency to "make 'em sing"...but the AR9's sing VERY WELL !!!!
  5. I've got 1979 AR9's in my main 2 channel system. I won't be using a 5.1/7.1/9.1 surround processor/multi-channel amp but does anyone have any suggestions for vintage AR's as rear speakers?? Maybe the AR-14's or AR-92's. I would want them to cosmetically "blend" with the AR9's as well as possible and have the "sonic" capabilities to sort of "fill in" sound from behind with similar AR9 sound quality. Thanks guys.
  6. Roy: THANKS for that info. Sheets of the material is exactly what I'm looking for. I can use the mounting gaskets as a template and it should work just fine. I will keep in mind that something like this could work as a "functional" application, though what I'm wanting to do at the moment is merely for cosmetic purposes only. Yeah, I know..... ya can't see the woofers or drivers with the grilles on anyway, but I'm the type that wants things to look their best. Ya may not be able to see the drivers have no outer ring gaskets, but I KNOW they don't.....at least not yet. Thanks again.
  7. THANKS for the link. It looks to be the foam material used between the cabinet and the drivers for an "air-tight" fit, and excellent for enclosed designs. I have new gaskets to mount the drivers in the cabinets. What I'm in search of is the rubbery foam like material used on the outside around the woofers and the lower mid range driver. It basically needs to cover the exposed metal where the surrounds glue to the driver itself. But I will look around "parts express" and maybe I will come up with a few sheets of the material Im after. Thanks again.
  8. I recently picked up freshly refoamed original 200003 woofers and 200027 lower midrange drivers for my 1979 AR9's. They were done right and sound FAR BETTER than the AB Tech replacement drivers that they replaced, but they just don't look as good because they are all missing the gaskets that go around the outer edge of the basket to cosmetically cover the portion of the surrounds that glue to the basket frame itself. Can anyone tell me if it's still possible to locate these original gaskets ? (which I'm guessing it isn't.) Or can anyone point me in the right direction with a link to where this 1/8"to3/16" soft dense rubbery sort of dark brownish gray foam material can be purchased? If I could find the right material, I'm thinking I can use the mounting gasket used between the driver and the cabinet as a template and cut my own. ANY HELP, OPINIONS OR SUGGESTIONS IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.
  9. I have had a chance to listen and compare differences in the ABTech replacement and the original 200029-1 AR tweeter. My original does not have a foam absorber ring on it, though the ABTech Tweeter has foam glued to the face of it. In putting my ears right up to the individual tweeters, it easy to hear the differences. The AR tweeter has a much cleaner, softer and detailed sound:for lack of a better description it sounds as if it has much more "depth and substance" to it. The ABTech tweeter sort of "hisses" in comparison. Sitting back and hearing them at a normal listening volume is where the real difference is heard.AR tweeter is smoother and more detailed. And when "pouring the coals" to them (approx. 450wpc) the AR still remains clean and precise: the ABTech basically hisses, only much louder. My opinion is: they were right, the ABTech is better than no tweeter at all, but the originals seem to "blend" much better. BUT keep in mind that my lower mid drivers and side firing woofers are from ABTech as well, so my description in comparing these may not be the same with all originals. I will, however, keep the AB tweeter in when my original woofers and drivers are put in to give it another try with them. Of course it will only stay in long enough to compare it. Mine sound great but I'm guessing I'm not hearing anywhere near what they really sound like, so I'm looking forward to their arrival. If there's that much difference in the sound of a tweeter not being original, I'm thinking installing all original drivers is going to make a tremendous upgrade in the sound of these.
  10. I don't consider myself as ever having owned anything better than "mid high-end" gear but dating back to my first 'real" power contender in 1985 (my first Sansui 9090db) I haven't ever NOT used an equalizer. Started with the ADC SS3-IC and currently use 2 of the ADC SS525X. (for the variable volume control.)
  11. Very well put. I have only "restored" one other speaker: that being the Cerwin Vega D-9. I was able to own 5 pairs of them at once and in doing so was shocked to hear the difference in each pair. HUGE difference. So that got me to pulling drivers and crossovers and running some numbers. In doing so I learned that during it's manufacture life span between 1984-92, CV used 3 different woofer cones in the 152WR 15", 4 different variations in crossover networks and 2 different manufactureres of the CS5 tweeter. The result of my efforts proved with my ears (and with the testing "scope" of a buddy of mine) that the 1st woofer cone used, the 2nd variation of crossover and the later (after 1988) Taiwan manufactured tweeters (they started with Japan) sounded a night a day difference over the components they paired/used after 1988. So I'm hoping that I can get a much better sound in going with the early 1978-79 woofers/drivers in the AR9's. I'm also hoping for the same "night and day" differencewhen I put them in. (not that they don't sound GREAT just the way they are. But the D-9 sounded great to me too, until I learned pairing the right internals made a "MIRACLE".) As for D-9's.... if one was to put on a blindfold and listen to a side by side comparison of the early and later built D-9's they would pretty much swear to the fact that they were hearing two ENTIRELY different speakers. YES, there was THAT much of a noticable difference: in the early models winning the sound test by a LAND SLIDE. I will do some very close listening comparisons in the 200029 and the ABTech replacement tweeters and post what I come up with. I'm not sure how "accurate" my opinion will be because though I can tell these AR9's are VERY GOOD speakers(imo) I know I don't have them set up properly and won't be able to set them up properly due to my lack of room.
  12. It seems many AR9 owners(as well as many other vintage loudspeaker owners) share that very same theory...recap the crossovers. Mind if I ask what caps were used in yours and who did the job? As well as what might I expect to pay to have this parts/labor done to mine. I do not know enough about electronics or solder well enough to attempt this project on my own. Thanks again for your advice and knowledge.
  13. Dave" THANKS FOR MAKING IT ALL HAPPEN. They made it safe and sound and are about to have all original drivers put back in them.
  14. Alas....I now OWN a pair of these BEAUTIES.
  • Create New...