Aadams

Any feel for power response vs the original 3a tweeter?

I had a long post ready to go about more listening but I decided to sum it up in much shorter post. This hybrid evolved from an existing AR58 setup which can be restored at the push of a button so rather than focusing on Hybrid vs AR9 comparisons, I have spent a good bit of time listening to the original 58s system vs the Hybrid. I was questioning whether my enthusiasm was still grounded. It is. While the 58 has the AR dome drivers, its weakness, as with all big three-ways, is the 12 inch woofer having to carry the critical human voice octaves. The big difference between this hybrid stack and the 58s is the octave and a half between 200 and 700hz has been shifted to the 5 inch BA drivers and the difference clearly favors the Hybrid. This also accounts for why I think the Hybrid sounds more like an AR9. AR removed middle C (262hz) from the woofer beginning with the AR9 and all of their top systems were this way until the end.

There is an excellent bi-amping primer beginning on page 31 of the AR 9 reference manual in the library. Hits all of he big issues of bi-amping for those who insist on bi-amping nines, or anything else.

At the risk of hijacking my own thread I decided to address your post re tone controls in general and spectral balance on LSTs. First , before your antennae and wings begin to buzz, you can stand down because I agree with you, which must mean we are correct? When I first began listening to records I loved tone controls. After I began to spend real money I began to think tone controls really didn’t improve anything. Then, once I discovered the “straight wire with gain” cult, I became a purist that said tone controls were taboo and just another noise source, as long as one had good equipment and a proper listening environment. For me, this led to so much frustration that I quit the hobby for over a decade and just attended concerts. I only picked it up again one day when I was using a computer with headphones and discovered a software equalizer. Short version is I am back and I still don’t use tone controls but I love equalizers. In summary, we should have been using equalizers from the time they became practical and affordable. Adams

http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/comb-filtering AR Surround I had to read about comb filtering to answer your question. I would say that my term "lobing" was comb filtering. I noticed the problem disappeared when I changed the speaker angle from 90 degrees to 45 degrees. I also raised the crossover/transition frequency from a center on 125hz to a 250hz center, which may have had some effect. RE: 2 Satellites: The effect of using 2 CR65s was Ok but the BAs do not have the power response of the AR drivers and when I would rise from sitting in the listening spot I would notice a drop off in volume. This problem was solved by adding a third CR65. From my experience this approach does not work if you let all speakers run full range with zero equalization. I am speculating here but the LST spectral balance control seems to have been a built in equalizer with 5 different settings where AR engineers carefully balanced the output of the eight dome drivers with the woofer output. This is one reason why for this hybrid setup you need two equalizers and biamping. I will listen more closely for the comb filtering effect and report back. FM The different brand of speakers is not really a problem. You can use the equalizers to timbre match and get the sound to the point where a instrument on a BA sounds like the same instrument on an AR. In my instructions above on timbre matching I recommend using a human voice because most of us are better at recognizing specific voices than specific instruments but either will do IMO. The BA mids and tweets are still more detailed than my ARs but I can live with either and my other ARs are setup and on autopilot compared to this hybrid system that I am still not sure about with all of its angles and switches and knobs. Yes the two equalizers are 10 band RS units. They cost more to ship than to purchase and they work well enough. The equalizers are being used as gain controls as well as sound-shaping and timbre matching. I am not sure a Parametric equalizer would allow me to do that. 1/3 octave units might be of benefit but would also add complexity. I have to live with this config longer before deciding. Adams

I don't know what a Wilson TOTL Monster is but I will take it as a compliment. With regard to the LSTs, there is no way two of these Hybrids will equal the air moving ability of stacked LSTs but it could match the ability of an LST pair given the same room volume. Each hybrid stack has 9 drivers biamped. The BAs,which carry most of the musical, load are driven by a 500l watt/ch Crown. The 58s, which really only carry the bass, have 100 watts per side and the room is small . I don't know if you have read all of the posts in this thread as well as the ones that originated in the BA section but I understand your skepticism. We are about the same age and have been in this hobby for about the same time but this is not new. What I have done has been done before. It is not ground breaking in execution certainly. This is nothing more than an AR3 with a stack of AR3ts on top. It is in fact something similar to stacked LSTs with 16 blown tweeters and Jantzen electrostatics on top. All I have done is used two equalizers as outboard crossovers to create a transition point between two already proven and well regarded speaker systems. The groundbreaking part, if any, is the equipment to do this is now for sale dirt cheap waiting for someone to seize the opportunity. Before I powered up the third BA speaker my incremental investment was equivalent to $50 in 1975. You couldn't buy an equalizer for that price back then let alone 6 high performance wide range miniature two ways with drivers way more rugged than the comparatively dainty AR Domes in the AR3t or LST. When I wired the 3rd BA, I needed a more capable amp so I spent another 1975 equivalent $50. I now have a total of $100 additional 1975 dollars expended to build out this system with equipment that couldn't be purchased for any amount of money back in 1975. And If I had spent thousands of dollars to accomplish the same thing it would not be newsworthy. The news is, the price to upgrade from AR 58s sound to something much better is negligible. I am not going to spend time on credentials but I do know how live music from large string and wind ensembles is supposed to sound and I know that occasionally a recording played on a full range system, with some listener imagination, can be pretty convincing. When I say this Hybrid Monster sounds better in some ways than an AR9, I know it is true because the two systems are sitting very close to each other in my house fed simultaneously by the same program source. The smooth effortless extended bass of the AR 9 is not challenged by any single driver AR 12 inch but the full range of an orchestra can be convincingly represented on any competent system given a good balance of scale and proportion between the room and a music system with full range capability. All I can say is, it works and in the beginning I was as shocked as you are Lastly, I am honored that a thread I initiated attracted the attention of your acerbic wit. It is always good to have the opinion of an expert.

The BAs are wired in parallel. The 58s were already in place on a separate system.

This topic was spawned from the AR forum discussion of Dome Mids vs Cones. It seemed with all of the good full range 2way speakers available it should be possible to add a subwoofer and create a great sounding modern system comparable to a large AR for not much money. I originally placed this thread in the BA section because small BA speakers have a great reputation and are plentiful. There are hundreds of pairs of BA 2 ways for sale on the used market any time you choose to look. I eventually settled on BA CR65s as the tops. Objective: Create a system that will substantially duplicate the full range stereo sound of a Classic or ADD AR 12 inch speaker. Assumptions: Equalizer will be used Dual Subwoofers - one for each channel Mirrored pairs of two way bookshelf speakers positioned such that they produce a uniform soundfield covering at least a 90 degree angle per stereo channel. Mirrored triplets would be ok if it really can't be done with pairs. Sufficient, quality watts will be available. Question: This thread topic originated in a post I made in the BA forum. I have chosen to continue it in the mods and tweaks forum for the following reasons: 1. The original idea was a failure because of several issues which all stemmed from two main problems, a. Subwoofer performance vs Cost b. The difficulty of integrating the Subs with satellites yielding musicality equal to an AR12” 3 way speaker. 2. On a whim. I decided to salvage what was left and see what would happen if I used an AR58s as the bass module for each side. 3. IMO this topic is now about something other than AR or BA speakers alone. If you can imagine two AR3ts angled and sitting atop an AR3 then you can visualize a 12” LST2, which BTW never existed for sale. As I write this, I am listening to a similar configuration , only in this case I am using BA CR65s atop a AR58s pair. My original target with subs and satellites was to duplicate the 58s sound but, as I said, that was failure. What I am hearing now, and for the last five days, is easily equivalent to AR9s except in the very deepest base i.e. 32hz range. Edit: In retrospect, this last statement is early hyperbole from 2 years ago. This approach does produce AR9 level sound but is not easily reproducible until the April 7, 2018 post below. I don’t see why this can’t be done with any AR12” woofer system and two amps that can each carry a four ohm load. I already had the amps and 1 equalizer. The additional total cost for used equipment was about $150 which purchased 4 BA CR65s and an equalizer. Taking the system to the LST level will require an amp that can carry a 2 ohm load and another pair of BA speakers. I have been listening and comparing this arrangement to 9s and 3as all week using high dynamic, full range classical recordings and demanding non-classical. It does take some dialing in but it really works. Fearing I would come off sounding like just another hi fi nut I almost did not post but this is so doable at a bargain price I decided to share. I have received advice and tips from a few members on this forum that lead me to this but I did not drop your names in case you prefer to remain unconnected with this mess. Aadams

JIC anyone was watching this thread or wondered whatever happened, this post is to tidy up with a final report to avoid the thread-to-nowhere fate that frequently occurs. What has happened since mid-March: I acquired eight used CR 65s, average price approx. $25 each, with the intent of eventually connecting all of them in a stereo satellite/sub configuration. I purchased an additional used 10 band equalizer for $25 to vary the low or high pass cut off as needed. My ultimate goal was to create an LST type of system using satellites, powered subs and equalizers as the spectral balance controls. A core objective was to get great sound spending as little as possible. I learned early that the matched powered sub woofers could not be easily found both used and for sale. Having to purchase new sub woofers would severely question the fundamental constraint for the project but I rationalized that a total of $1k would be ok. The project was a failure because: 1. Powered Subs with the musicality and reach of an AR 12inch are not cheap. A sub that can effortlessly reach low enough may not be musical in getting there. Conversely, one that is musical enough may not have the low end reach. In Summary Powered subs are a crapshoot. 2. Integration of the powered sub with the satellites is not easy and even with a lot of effort not guaranteed. I was not able to satisfactorily get this done, even using two equalizers, and sub-woofers with both high and low pass capability. I am sure there are many powered subwoofers that make wonderful ordnance delivery simulators for the home but when I listen to music that I care about I want it to sound right, the way it sounds on 9s and 3as. I never listen to detonations. Also I never scaled beyond 2 CR65s per side because I was never completely comfortable with the sound in the lower mid bass region. I am sure I could have eventually spent enough money to be satisfied but then it wouldn’t be a hobby, it would just be shopping until I got exactly the right thing. I quit the sub woofer search, returned everything for a refund and reflected on what good came from the project. This is what I discovered: 1. The BA CR65 and CR75, probably all CRx5 series, are gems 2. If you place CR65s atop AR58s and bi amp using an equalizer on each amp it works great 3. This thread is no longer about satellites and powered subs rather about Mods and Tweaks This project continues and is showing great promise. If you are interested, my posts on this topic have moved to the Mods and Tweaks section of the forum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife_acceptance_factor

Just having some fun. To me the answer is obvious but it could be that you listen to music that would never test the limits of the 3a in which case you could get the 5 and hear what a 3a sounds like without any extra hassle with amplifiers. If you get the 3s IMO it would be less trouble to either get a speaker selector switch with an impedance protection circuit or another power amp and feed it from the tape in/out on your amp if it is available. Used speaker selector switches are cheap and dead simple to use. I was introduced to them on this forum by ra ra who recommended an Adcom GFS 6, which I later purchased.

Is this a trick question? I'll bite. Get the 3s. Worst case is get a speaker selector switch with an impedance limiter.

"designed-in midrange emphasis" as much as 'intentionally erring to that side of the voice.' Words are pesky creatures. One person's emphasis is another's bias or " intentional erring". Willco Adams

Yes, I feel that both the 55 and 65 will sound quite nice and spacious, especially in the far field (8-10+ feet back from the speakers). If I had to guess, I'd say a 2-3dB cut between 800-1600 will do wonders. Steve F. Are you saying the designed-in mid range emphasis of the 55 and 65 is centered on 1200hz? Adams

Thanks I used the term " mirrored pairs" because I couldn't think of another way to say it without being verbose. I understand what it usually means and from your response I know you know exactly what I meant. Looks like I will use CR65s because I already have one pair. I love this board! Adams

The 55 or 65 w a really good sub crossed over at around 100Hz should be an excellent-sounding system. The difference between an 11 and a BA/sub system will be more because of tonal balance than because of power response. The BAs are simply more 'forward' through the midrange than the ARs, although the BAs are not 'too bright' or 'harsh' by any means. The 3a simply sounds too different to be considered in this conversation. You'd have to turn the treble control down by about 7dB when using the BAs to be a decent match for the 3a. Thanks Steve F. I agree the CR65 is a better speaker than the A40. I am aware of BA mid range brightness which is why I will use an equalizer to tailor treble and mid range to taste and from experience, I know that a seamless transition between sub and satellite can be frustrating. But it seems that you are thinking that the sound field produced by mirrored pairs will be high and wide with no apparent beaminess using either the 55 ort 65. Is that a correct interpretation ?

Question There is a large number of CR series for sale right now. CR55 through CR85 are available. CR55 has a 4.5 inch woofer ¾ inch tweeter and crosses at 4200Hz CR65 has a 5.25 inch woofer ¾ inch tweeter and crosses at 4200Hz CR75 has 6.5 inch woofer 1.0 inch tweeter and crosses at 2500Hz CR85 has 7.0 inch woofer 1.0 inch tweeter and crosses at 2500Hz Does one model among these stand out as producing broader angle power response if used in mirrored pairs, at least based on what you know or and can see in the data above or both? Or in practical terms are they all going to be about the same when used as a pair per stereo channel? And would pairs be sufficient to approximate an AR11 or 3a power response? Thanks Adams

This topic was spawned from the AR forum discussion of Dome Mids vs Cones. Let me say first of all that I prefer AR 12 inch speaker systems over others because they have the sound qualities I like already designed into them which in turn makes them easier to set up for my listening preferences. However there are at least four problems with owning 12 inch ARs : The parts supply is diminishing The price is climbing for complete functioning units as well as good DIY candidates Shipping, which is almost always required, risks damage to unblemished cabinet corners or drivers that is almost intolerable, regardless of refund, if one factors in the lost opportunity The paranoia from imagining having to rebuild by sound systems if I lost all of my ARs through some disastrous event, assuming I live through it. Because well designed speakers were not exclusive to AR, I have come to believe that the AR sound could be substantially duplicated with readily available high quality bookshelf speakers having certain characteristics and I have placed this thread in the BA section because from experience I know that BA produced many high quality two way speakers. I own a pair of A40s and CR65s that I purchased new which, within their limits, are good little speakers. There are hundreds of pairs of BA 2 ways for sale on the used market any time you choose to look. I believe what I want to do could be achieved relatively inexpensively with used BA bookshelf speakers but I don't know which ones would make the best candidates to meet my requirements, which are as follows: Objective: Create a system that will substantially duplicate the full range stereo sound of a Classic or ADD AR 12 inch speaker. Assumptions: Equalizer will be used Dual Subwoofers - one for each channel Mirrored pairs of two way bookshelf speakers positioned such that they produce a uniform soundfield covering at least a 90 degree angle per stereo channel. Mirrored triplets would be ok if it really can't be done with pairs. Sufficient, quality watts will be available. Question: Does anyone here have a well informed opinion about which Boston Acoustics two ways would be the best candidates for use in this project which, by the way, is real. Note: I know there are other good 2 way brands available but please limit this to Boston Acoustics because they are so numerous. Also, I have stated the problem as clearly as I know how given that I am not an engineer of any kind. Please feel free to elaborate, qualify or extend but please try to be constructive.

AR 2x and AR 14 would be two other examples.

Agree. That is why I said 12" AR. Horn loaded JBLs were among my first speakers and the "presence" is what sucked me in. The compromise with regard to slightly husky female voices on 12" ARs with 3 drivers is not really a problem for me. Listening to large scale classical I prefer the presentation of the AR3as. Modern popular music I prefer the AR9.

I do understand why someone might want a "big boy 8". Listening to the human voice on a 12 inch AR is a compromise. If your music preferences tend toward more intimate or small scale works with little to no material below 50Hz then it certainly makes sense to have a speaker such as the one being discussed here but there is no way that one will sense the impact of a large scale orchestral work or even Lady Gaga with an 8" or even 10" woofer.

Exactly!

Owlspace Do you mean all 6 pairs of speakers in the same room playing at the same time from one source? Adams