Asok

Similar here - 8k on an audiology test but around 9.5k online. The doc at the test said that my tinnitus (high pitched ringing) is probably actually masking a further 2-3k. Getting rid of those crickets is another impossible hurdle though.

'AR is pretty much as modern as any of them.' On the basis of the mechanics - perhaps. Basic laws of physics have not changed so in that regard, absolutely yes. However speakers are of course more than their mechanical actions and those actions vary depending on what those parts are made from and how precise the assembly has been. The materials used in speakers made in the last 10 years (at least, perhaps 20) have changed. Computer design has lead to the ability to make parts with micro-millimetre, even microscopic precision, making for more efficient vibration, distortion and noise suppression as well as more efficient dispersal and control of sound waves. Internal bracing is now often (expensive) machined alloys, cabinets are now a wide range of stiffer materials (metal, stone, fibreglass & composites). Then there is the advent of DSP control within some speakers themselves. Loads of changes and innovations have occurred - does this make them 'better' than older speakers? Sometimes, yes, but not always in my opinion, just different mostly.

Side By Side Test Here's my subjective impressions comparing my: 1978 AR9s, purchased 2nd hand in 1986 (new caps in 1990, new foam surrounds 1990, 2014), 87db/1m, 40hms - and: My now main speakers, Golden Ear Triton One (2016 models, purchased from dealer 2019) 92db/2.83v/m, 8ohms Both were alternatively hooked up using same speaker wire to a NAD M33 (Class D, 200w into 8ohms, 380 into 4ohms, DIRAC not engaged) set up in my lounge listening room Streaming sources were Tidal playing, High, FLAC and MQA files Various Hi-res down to Mp3 files via ethernet from a Synology NAS CD via OPPO BDP 105 out to M33 via coaxial Vinyl via Rega P6 with Ortofon Quintet Bronze direct to M33 Phono-in (note: the M33 digitizes all incoming phono signals -there is no analogue domain) I played a wide range of source material from deep, modern dance electronica, historical acoustic jazz, hard rock and pop to baroque chamber works. There was also a range of male and female singers with minimal instrumental backing, however most of my tastes run to instrumental works. There are some common-ish speaker design elements: roughly similar height and footprint (weight is: 59kg AR, 37kg GE; Height is 53 inches and 54 inches respectively) and the use of 'some form' of side firing woofers/augmentation design - 2 in each AR, 4 in each GE (these are actually 'passive radiators', included to augment the 3, front facing woofers). While the AR is a 4-way and the GE is technically a 3-way, some regard that the passive radiators make it a 4 way - whatever. Apart from that very loose commonality they are very different beasts. The GE uses a D'Appolito array for mids and treble, while the treble itself is a folded ribbon, vs the liquid cooled AR tweeter. The Triton One cutaway The AR9s 2018 The Triton Ones 2020 I set them up with the ARs next to and outside of the GEs. I did this comparison in 2021 when the M33 arrived and regret not taking photos of the duo arrangement at the time. Doing it again is impossible as moving the 59kg ARs back into my living room is not an option for both my spine and my significant other right now. The ARs sit in my studio out back usually, powered by a simple, low powered amp. For years I had driven the ARs by a NAD 7100 pre out to a pair of NAD 2200 power amps. At times friends would loan me various amps to try (ME, Krell, McIntosh) and it always confirmed what we all know -that they really opened up and thrived on gobs of power. The 2200s did a fabulous job, but those other bigger beaties did it better. So I was pleasantly surprised when I hooked them up to the M33 (which wasn't around when the speakers were changed over). The NAD had that ability to drive the ARs really, really well. In fact I had forgotten how engaging these speakers really were - they just sang. I had been living with the GEs for 4 years and new them well with 3 years under the M33 so this change of character using the ARs was exciting and a bit like returning to an old, lost memory (or girlfriend 😉). Switching back to the GEs and then back to the ARs again was fairly quick with banana plugs saving the day and was quite revealing. This was hardly a scientific test (cognitive bias, time delay etc) but even so: First, general impressions - the ARs still held their place with an organic, enveloping comfort, an effortless ease kinda thing. The GEs were more present and a bit more revealing. Bass - across a wide variety of sources and musical genres I find (in my room anyway) that the GEs 'seemed' deeper and more articulated, especially on electronic material. The ARs, with their 12 inch woofers topped them in bass quality, timbre and what might be called emotional personality. Bass extension seemed similar but punch and wallop (which also includes mids of course) went to the ARs by just a smidge. Bass of the ARs was more overall satisfying and better integrated when playing chamber music and topped the GEs there. Mids - this was very dependant on source/genre, but if I had to push it I'd say the GEs for clarity and presence the ARs for involvment. Treble - Definitely the GEs for normal to loud (ish) levels. The folded ribbon is very revealing but not in a fatiguing way. However upon turning things up to 90db+ levels the ARs just settled in and commanded things more elegantly. The GEs ribbon will strain a bit at high volume levels, but then I usually never play anything at those levels these days.. Imaging - at all volume levels and across all genres/sources the GEs win hands down - they are phenomenal at this. The ARs are more contained here, always have been. So that's the cut regarding audio elements, but enjoying music to me isn't about that. While they are very important and can annoy me if not present or 'off' they do not define my listening experience. The subjective emotion, the involvment, the unconsciuos toe-tap all mean a richer and more satisfying experience for me - it's about presentation. The ARs still do this, they just have a 'get-on-with-it' quality, the music sometimes just seems to 'fall' out of the speakers in a no-fuss, easily delivered way - total involvement. They are 'warm' and 'inviting', rather like riding in an older Bently (if you've had that pleasure) which purrs along in statley leisure then suddenly presses you back into the seat and really impresses while making you feel safe and in full control. And the bass- yes, their bass has a personality and a complete, 'not bothered' approach. The GEs I love, am very happy to keep them as my main speakers. The involve me on a different level, the emotion and toe-tap can be there but the detail, the wonder and the giggles that they can produce just get me everytime -they have an addictive quality, I can look into music more deeply it seems. Their highly revealing nature can sometimes work against them when playing less than stellar recordings but not that often. I don't think there is a lot of really meaningful difference in 45 years of acoustic engineering that I can see (as regards to my choices anyway - those with more expensive and/or grander systems may disagree). This review is limited perhaps by one important factor - my ARs I'm sure could probably benefit from another round of recaps and rewiring, perhaps the tweeters could be replaced etc etc - I may get around to that, especially if I ever do decide to sell but I'm not in a hurry.