Sonnar

Curves are identical in the bass and midbass region, same or similar woofer , they 're absolutely comparable. Conversely, they 're very different in midrange and highrange, different loudspeakers, different crossover. As Tom Tyson said , the AR 3's tweeter " had a gently rising characteristic " , as everyone can see by the graphics , while AR 3a has a well-known gentle roll-off starting at 5 Khz . I'm not saying which one sounds better , but they 're surely different speakers, different sounding.

These measurements were made in half space , absolutely comparable. They shows a well known rolloff in AR 3a's tweeter , and, opposite, a fast rising response in AR 3's tweeter .

No, AR 3 sounds more transparent and sparkling, curves are very different in mid-high region.

Many people knows AR 3a, and when they listen to AR 3 they says " midranges are gone ". Wrong. The real AR 3 frequency response is very different from 3a , quite opposite . Midrange is very quiet , understated , while AR 3a's midranges are very strong : however , while AR 3a's tweeter has a gentle roll-off , AR 3's tweeter has a rising response , exceptional sparkling highs never harsh, quite electrostatic . I think original Villchur 's AR are very different from AR of Teledyne era. Best wishes Adriano

Never seen in Italy although we were the most important market for AR outside U.S. . I remember a shy three-way , 8" woofer by Avid in mid '70s. In early '80s JBL made the L 86 with the same mid and tweeter of the L 112 and L 150 , but with an 8" woofer instead of 12" : but L 112 and L 150 made big sales while nobody cares of L 86 . In mid '70s , JBL sold in Italy more L 100 Century and 4311 than L 36 Decades . AR's and JBL's customers probably wants the best bass response their money could buy , and it seems a nonsense to have a speaker with expensive midrange and tweeter and a poor bass response by a small woofer . Adriano

der, differences between 3 and 3a are very subtle . I have 'em both and I love 'em both , and I 'm not able to say which one is better. Surely they 're the finest speakers ever made . Adriano

I mean it's impossible to compare speakers judging through a recorded and reproduced track. It makes a sense comparing speakers live, a late production AR 3 isn 't so much older than an AR 3a, and if properly recapped they 're comparable. What is Your " live " impression? Cheers, Adriano

If I could have trusted of my pc 's audio I will say AR 3 has better highs , the sound is faster and more detailed and clean : AR 3a is a bit gloomy , but it' s impossible to compare two speakers in this way. Adriano

Unfortunately my father sold his AR 3 in 1969/70 for a pair of new 3a, then LST, AR 10Pi , Allison:One , B&W DM6, Magneplanar Tympani T1D . I bought my AR 3's first pair in 2008, and the second pair in 2013 . In 1970 I was a 10 years old boy very involved in hi-fi , and I remember the differences between 3 and 3a , and it' s the same difference today. AR 3 aren't speakers for everyone. Many friends, listening to AR 3 says they' re boring, dull, and says AR 3a have no highs. Then, listening to my Altec/JBL horn system they says " Wow , a real live performance ! I like it ! " Wrong . Impressive , but not real. It 's not a live performance , it ' s their idea of a live performance. That 's the reason why during 70's Many people prefers Jbl L100 Century and L166 Horizon over 3a and 10Pi in A / B comparison in hi-fi shops, and for the same reason AR tends to produce speakers with more sparkling sound and higher sensitivity. Anyway, this morning I decided to measure my AR 3's frequency response in room , with a primitive but effective method: a B&K cd third-octave frequency cd and a Sennheiser microphone wired to mic- input of a a Revox A-700 RtR , using its vu-meters to calibrate signal. Excellent woofer's linearity , except for a proununced peak of 6 db at 250 Hz. At 1.25 khz the meter was 2db down , and at 2.5 khz the meter was at -3db respect to 1 khz. Then, absolute flatness until 10 khz. At this point, I decided to use my Soundcraftsmen PE 2217 preamp-equalizer slightly exaltating 1280/2560 region , and voices becomes immediately more focused and intelligible , but strings shows a bit of honkiness very similar to 3a . The verdict? I don 't know, with baroque and chamber music I prefer AR 3 without equalization, with jazz or modern music in general perhaps a little boost gives a more vivid image. Every speaker is a compromise, just like everything in our life. My best wishes, Adriano

It' s impossible to compare two different speakers in different rooms and with different cd players or turntables and different amplifiers . I 've heard AR LST sounding wonderful in some rooms and very bad in other rooms , and I remember a pair of JBL 4343 sounding great in a recording Studio , but never in home applications. Anyway , never compare a speaker with your favorite speaker - compare it with acoustic live instruments. Adriano

I agree with your analisys of the differences between 3 vs. 3a , however my four AR 3 were totally recapped with high quality german-made polypropilene capacitors. Before the recapping they were a bit " muddy " and dull: with new caps they becomes vivid, clean , transparent and shiny . I don' t believe in deterioration of these loudspeakers by the age : I have a pair of 58 yesrs old AR 2 , 100.5 db with 10 watts at five feet in AR 's specs , it means more than 90 db 1W/5ft. . When I have to search a modern tweeter to match this old Alnico woofer the greatest difficulty was in founding a dome tweeter with at least 91 db sensitivity. After 58 years, the AR 2 's 10" Alnico woofer still offers exceptional bass and great sensitivity . Greetings , Adriano

Thanks Roger, in fact I know AR 3 and 3a better than any other speaker , and better than my wife or my daughters, simply because I was a two-years old kid when my ears were delighted by this marvelous speaker ( AR 3 ) . At the time of my birth, my father had AR 2 - so I 'm a real classic original AR man! Cheers, Adriano

I have two pairs of AR 3 , and they sound identical. My father had AR 3 , bought new in early '60, they had early " gold thread "grilles. When he bought the new AR 3a in 1969/70, we noticed immediately a similar but different sound. AR 3a's midrange has a more powerful radiating dispersion , so voices are prominent and well defined , but AR 3a is also a bit " honky " in comparison to the smooth linearity and neutrality of the AR 3 : to appreciate AR 3's sound You have to know the sound of live acoustic instruments just like a violin, and don' t compare it with other speakers. If You compare it with AR 10Pi , You could say You prefer this one because it has more presence : but to me AR 10Pi is a bright speaker with some tendence to honkiness . At the same time, I could say that my Altec 802/811b driver/horn sounds more transparent and shows better voices than any direct-radiating dome, but they are really prominent and honky and strings are unbearable . It' s a mistake, it' s a fake transapency : in fact , AR 3a and 10Pi midrange tends to hide some delicate nuances while AR 3' s smoothness is more revealing , less spectacular perhaps but surely more accurate. Obviously , AR were born to reproduce Haendel and Mozart, not exactly pop-rock. Greetings, Adriano

My father bought this AR Amplifier , perhaps in 1969 , it's a 220 V version made for European sales and it' s still in use . Mine hasn 't headphone jacks, and has the AR inc. logo. A good amp, warm and good sounding, and very dynamic ! Best wishes, Adriano

Another problem could be the balance between AR 3a's midrange and a little 8" woofer . The AR mid, in it its various versions, is incredibly powerful and radiates on a very large angle . To have a correct tonal balance You have to use at least two " 8 woofers , and two lodspeakers operating at the same frequencies often causes problems. Here in Europe there are a lot of column speakers with multiple little woofers and high-tech dome midranges and tweeters. Never heard one of them well sounding. Crisp, glassy, bright, hyper-detailed, with poor bass response and totally unpleasant.