Jump to content

AR-XA in box?


frankmarsi
 Share

Recommended Posts

6-22-18

Who will be the dedicated AR-XA fan to buy this?  Is it worth the asking price?

I can see that the plinth is already starting to turn that strange look on the surface but, its already old even if only in a box.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-AR-INC-Turntable-33-45-RPM-Acoustic-Research-w-Orig-Box-Dust-Cover-NOS/312169004185?hash=item48aeb8fc99:g:MRYAAOSw2FVbLElG

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Brother.

A half dozen photos of the cardboard box, like it's Tut's Tomb, or something. For a starting bid of $400, it would be nice to see the condition of the wood base and outer platter.

From the photos provided, you can see that the top finish is disintegrating, and one closeup reveals a broken tonearm rest.  And what's going on with those cables?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In any event, a dedicated fan would do a complete restoration. I would never purchase it until the seller came forth with a full set of of fotos, screw that stuff about it being in a box.

I still have mine and although it’s been knocked around half in a box since 1974, it too is in need of a restoration of course. Re-paint the plinth, replace tonearm, find a better way to re-balance the ’T-bar’ arm as a heavier arm would necessitate, oil the wood base, etc.

In ’72 I had paid the MSRP of $78.00 and was in love with it at the time. Now, I would only rebuild it as a pass-time as I’ve moved on to bigger and better and its use for me would be back-stepping. 

Personally, I'm more interested in listening to music as compared to tinkering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like i said above, I paid $78. for my AR-XA in 1972 so, I have to ask myself is it worth it to put money into it ending up with 

the same four sided 1/2 inch wooden box with a motor and rubber belt and a Fisher-Price tonearm. Or, simply use what I already have which run extremely well, have speed-

control, can easily mount an S.M.E. or practically any other high-quality tonearm, has leveling feet, and weigh 26-35 lbs.?

Since I presently own 6 SL-120's all in excellent condition along with two SL-1100's both in near mint condition with even more tonearm mounting options or stare at 

an entry-level little basic table with a flimsy arm?. My experience says no. Experience also says the afore mentioned Technics tables run so much better, maintain accurate speeds and are built like Mac trucks.  Sound so much more 'real' to musical sounds by, conveying explosive transients, having amazing transparency across the musical band where every instrument is clearly outlined in its own musical space and in addition allow for a plethora of cartridge and arm choices.

I think most would agree to the clear and obvious choice.

FM

Below: My mint Dynavector 505 tonearm on my mint SL-1100 table with acrylic arm board and Ortofon Cadenza Blue cartridge. Do I dream of using a AR-XA? 

CIMG2313 copy.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, frankmarsi said:

6-22-18

Who will be the dedicated AR-XA fan to buy this?  Is it worth the asking price?

I can see that the plinth is already starting to turn that strange look on the surface but, its already old even if only in a box.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-AR-INC-Turntable-33-45-RPM-Acoustic-Research-w-Orig-Box-Dust-Cover-NOS/312169004185?hash=item48aeb8fc99:g:MRYAAOSw2FVbLElG

 

ar-xa.jpg

Oh Wow! (That is extraordinary).

I bought one brand new in 1969 for 75 dollars ?. 

Brings back the memory of all those intricate pieces of protective cardboard fitting like a puzzle to shield everything in there.

 I would challenge anybody to put it back the way it came were it necessary!

 I STILL have the original box (sans) packing material, though it has been repurposed.

Also, I have the see saw gram scale and the tool for setting the correct tone arm length depending on the cartridge.

 I did loose one thing that was cool....the supplied 45 rpm adapter made Of machined aluminum (that was a nice piece.)

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, frankmarsi said:

Like i said above, I paid $78. for my AR-XA in 1972 so, I have to ask myself is it worth it to put money into it ending up with 

the same four sided 1/2 inch wooden box with a motor and rubber belt and a Fisher-Price tonearm. Or, simply use what I have already have which run extremely well, have speed-

control, can easily mount an S.M.E. or practically any other high-quality tonearm, has leveling feet, and weigh 26-35 lbs.?

Since I presently own 6 SL-120's all in excellent condition along with two SL-1100's both in near mint condition with even more tonearm mounting options or stare at 

an entry-level little basic table with a flimsy arm?. My experience says no. Experience also says the afore mentioned Technics tables run so much better, maintain accurate speeds and are built like Mac trucks.  Sound so much more 'real' to musical sounds by, conveying explosive transients, having amazing transparency across the musical band where every instrument is clearly outlined in its own musical space and in addition allow for a plethora of cartridge and arm choices.

I think most would agree to the clear and obvious choice.

FM

Below: Mint Dynavector 505 tonearm on SL-1100 table with acrylic arm board and Ortofon Cadenza Blue cartridge. Do I dream of using a AR-XA? 

CIMG2313 copy.JPG

So pretty!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, frankmarsi said:

David, please don't tell me you bought it?

FM

No. I just found the ad odd as there are more pics of the box than the TT.

I don't understand why they wouldn't pull it from the box so potential buyers could get a REAL look at the unit.

I'm happy with my Sansui TT   

 

129_2905.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Pete B. you should hear how it sounds.

When they first came out I believe in 1977, it won an award for Best in Design and received many accolades internationally.

It also appeared on a couple of album covers but, merely as an eye-catching prop. I recall seeing it in a Manhattan hi-fi store when first released and it was absolutely impressive looking. However, at the time with a somewhat closed mind due to low-budget-mindedness perceptions,  I dismissed it. The latest iteration lists over 8 grand, discounted to $5,500. and is still being made.

These days I own two, one in black and the one above in silver. They have this uncanny ability to present a rock-solid bass response, the sort of bass that reaches down and is felt in your stomach and rib-cage. Of course ushered in by four 12 inch AR woofers and power by two PL-700 Series II amps to assist.

Out of a collection of several S.M.E. 3009 Pre-Improved arms, a couple of Grace F840 arms that I slightly modified to accommodate heavier cartridges, that are also new favorites of mine, an Infinity Black-Widow (for light carts.), a Jelco 750D, a Fidelity Research FR54 and a Micro-Seiki 303 arm, these Dynavector's are quite amazing sounding to the point of saying; they simply must be heard to be believed and appreciated. Again,  they can and do provide a subterranean bass response, the kind that reaches down and grabs you and almost commands you, like I never heard before. They are quite easy to use, and an absolute joy to listen to.

Although my long time favorites have always been the S.M.E. 3009 Pre-Improved because it is so neutral, I find the Grace F840's as good because of their openness and wonderful separation of instrument sounds, and maybe a touch more detailed. The Dynavector as shown above has been on a table now for almost a year now as I just can't stop enjoying it's captivatingly attractive sound. I've neglected all other arms in my collection, it's that good sounding. And since it's capable of supporting the heaviest of cartridges, it's perfect for me as I've moved-on to using heavier MC cartridges.  Its sound presentation is like stepping out of an economy car and getting into a 3 ton limousine if you catch my drift.

I will say that although it's impressive to see its intricate design in person, seeing it is almost overwhelming as it's a bear to look at as I am so use to using more delicate tonearms. Once one becomes familiar, it's as easy to use as any other high-quality arm and is easy to set-up. It does weigh almost 4kgs. and cannot be used on suspended tables, so no, it won't work on an AR-XA.

It easily holds the stylus pressure evenly across the disk where many arms of lesser quality may tend to vary, something I wasn't aware of until I started critically setting-up all of my tonearms. It has excellent separation of each instrument's sound and location in the sound-stage, though I find the Grace F840 arms may have a deeper and wider sound-stage.  Nevertheless, the sound it produces is impressive and natural in its over-all presentation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6-23-18

Before the ‘Granny- Aunt’, or ‘holy-than-thou’ viewpoints and non-cognoscenti opinions start flying from those less better equipped, and before the defensiveness of their equipment begins.

Let me first just say yes, one could be happy with whatever they may have. However, undeniably, there will always be something better out there. It’s easy to understand.

Or perhaps it’s like I mentioned above: “”somewhat closed mind due to low-budget-mindedness perceptions,  I dismissed it.””. But, I don’t begrudge anyone for wanting to stay at a certain level. That’s a personal decision and the same as I did though not my choice to stay at that entry or beginner’s level as I strived for more to enjoy in my HI-Fi expereince.

My goal and viewpoint was to better my listening experience as I have had a small number of lesser pieces early in my hi-fi experience and learned from them. So, I learned and moved up the ladder of quality and to a better listening experience over-all as is my choice.

I’ve frequented many listening salons and stores and did much personal evaluation and spoke to many who knew much more than I did and certainly had more experience. I’ve read countless articles and have read countless test-reports going back close to 50 years worth of ‘time-in’ this hobby/field.

Most of all, I’ve been listening with a self-trained ‘critical-ear’ and have taught myself and learned through experience, much monetary expense and time what ‘better’ really means in the hi-fi world of music reproduction. Not in the last 5 or 6 years, or even the last 10 or 25 years but, many years more than that, since I was 15 or 16. I’m sure others have also though, some chose to stay at a certain level and not better or increase their listening pleasures. I chose to always strive for better than what I already had at the time.

Anyone can spend tons of money on a hi-fi system and still not know how to listen or even know what they’re listening to. I’ve read about folks often on ‘audiogon’ who have to find a dealer to install a cartridge or tonearm, some don’t know how to hook-up components or what the next best piece of old or new music is.  Just like I didn’t buy “XAM speakers”, a E.J. Korvettes house brand when I went looking to buy AR-3a speakers back in late 1971 early 1972. I didn’t chose KLH or Advent, or even JBL among numerous others.

I choose AR as being the better speaker as many who occupy these pages would concur.   I was targeting Wharfdale  A60 & 70, AR 2AX's and AR5's, but I held out until I could find at a discounted price AR 3a’s.

So, before what’s his face comes out again and says “ As long as you’re happy, that’s all that matters” stop and ask him why did he buy AR speakers in the first place? Would he/she, have been happy with brand X speakers or brand Z? If he did and came to this site and preached that, what would the majority of members say to him or her?  I can easily guess something like: ”Yes but, AR speakers sound so much better.”

So, living in a free society we can achieve, do, and have almost anything we care to, as long as it doesn't hurt or harm anyone else followed by the fact that we must all observe a certain code of ethics and obey written laws.

FM

P.S. This is where I started listening in the late 1950’s, early '60s. My dear father had this since before I was born and my older sisters and he enjoyed 78 RPM records on, some of which I still have and they’re dated from the 1930’s in my dad’s collection. Sadly, my ‘rock and roller’ sister’s collection from the early 1950’s till 1959 were wrongly destroyed by her off-spring.

Anyway, this web-swipe below is the closest I could find to post here and it in my recollection is the correct model. On the inside’s top lift-up door it read: “RCA Victrola”.

It had, as I recall at least 5 or 6+ radio bands, most of which were ‘short-wave’ and we could hear Europe, South American and so on. Its speaker was a 12 inch electromagnetic-controlled type. And, its metal felt coated turntable platter could only played 78’s with an actual ‘needle’. Actually, it was more of a roofing-nail because the stylus/steel needle could easily be driven into a sheet-rock wall or roofing shingles, maybe even concrete. My father and I as an observer were always changing tubes to keep it alive until one day…….I came home from the beach and he was down the basement destroying it with a hammer and small pry-bar claiming that the new- 

(in 1960))Magnavox consolette he had bought us was better and he couldn’t afford or find the new tubes it so desperately needed.

Fondly, I’ll never forget the big sounding bass output it had. That bass led me to AR-3as.

In fact, this unit made me a ‘bass-hound’’ and to this day I remain the same sort of bass concerned person. And in response to another trending post here: There ain’t nothing like a 12 inch or15 inch speaker if you are having a conversation about realistic- sounding bass.

As a side note: Two weeks ago I had my bought new in spring of 1968 Fender Bassman amplifier repaired. It wasn't broken, just that I hadn't played it or even turned it on in 45 years.This time I wasn't taking any chances concerning 'cap' replacing. I did have the 6 power-supply caps and a few others replaced in the pre-stage board and replaced also its two huge 6L6 tubes because one had become microphonic, re-biased and good to go. In 1972 I replaced the two original 12 inch Jensen speakers it had from the factory with two 15 inch 'Ovation' speakers but, I didn't have the information/formula as to how much bigger I was supposed to increase the reflex-port size to accommodate the bigger speakers so, they may be suffering a bit as they sit.

When I brought the amp home and plugged it into the speakers, it sounded fine for my purposes as I'm not gigging any longer. 

Long live BASS!

FM

                    

Edited by frankmarsi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, dynaco_dan said:

This is the earliest 2 speed motor set.

Finally......back on topic. There might be a very nice TT inside all of that original packing material, but it is a pretty weak auction listing for a product that deserves some better exposure. Or maybe not? Vern has noted a missing belt, which might likely require replacement anyway, but one has to wonder what else are we not supposed to see besides the fractured arm support that is most obvious? The dust cover does appear to be in VGC, but when the listing touts the "newness" and hints at "unused", all I see are potentially fragile cables and a packing box that looks like it's been taped and re-packaged a half dozen times.

I like the early AR tables a whole lot - - I have two XA's and an XB, but $400 for openers? As the ancient adage suggests, "a fool and his money are soon parted." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DavidR said:

Bill (405x5), I really enjoy my jazz on vinyl using my Bob Latino tube amp. I wouldn't think of listening to jazz any other way.

Hi David,

Of course It’s all subjective regarding equipment and listening preferences....I totally get that.

As a retired, semi professional drummer, I’m very attuned to accurate sound and kept two sets of drums tuned and sized if you will for the gig at hand.

My point is, I’ve never made a correlation between musical genre and what type of equipment it is rendered on, in the context of recorded music.

Your preference for jazz on records Is probably because many early recordings of all genre tossed onto CD were simply awful.

A huge black eye for the digital domain in the early days.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2018 at 2:42 PM, frankmarsi said:

6-22-18

Who will be the dedicated AR-XA fan to buy this?  Is it worth the asking price?

I can see that the plinth is already starting to turn that strange look on the surface but, its already old even if only in a box.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-AR-INC-Turntable-33-45-RPM-Acoustic-Research-w-Orig-Box-Dust-Cover-NOS/312169004185?hash=item48aeb8fc99:g:MRYAAOSw2FVbLElG

 

ar-xa.jpg

This is definitely not "new-old stock," but rather an AR-XA (or TA) that "has a box with it."  Most responsible AR Turntable owners held on to the boxes.  What this seller is trying to do it convince potential buyers that this turntable has never been used and has been in the box forever.  One look at the way the inserts are arranged on top of the platen (obviously, the seller wasn't familiar with the way the turntable packed into the original box), and it's clear that the turntable has definitely been out of the box. 

This is my old AR two-motor turntable, and how one should look if well preserved.  I displayed this one at the AR "40th Birthday Party" in New York in 1994, too.  The pictures below were taken a couple months ago, the turntable was build around 1963.

AR-XA_2-Motor_Tyson_003.thumb.JPG.7fa6987f9d1e1050dbf54df4c061850e.JPG

AR-XA_2-Mtr_002.thumb.jpg.5aa2be081f9ffe6131f3375e3e7c5a98.jpg

AR-XA_2-Mtr_006.thumb.jpg.130cd5c721c5671a2a72c8269641d8b2.jpg

AR-XA_2-Motor_Tyson_005.thumb.JPG.4bea724b11da029c60bee07a4cca9228.JPG

--Tom Tyson

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom, answer if you please or simply avoid but, what to you listen to mostly vinyl, or CD?  I'm just curious. I use CDs while vacuuming, writing out checks for bills, using the keyboard and whenever I don't intend to be moved by the music or simply want background music or just feeling lazy as vinyl takes some effort just like anything else that is worth while to mount a vinyl disk.

Regardless of your answer,  please don't fear that I may sway away from vinyl as I am committed to it since back in the early seventies when I became an AR speaker owner and even more so when the resurgence re-started the wonderful world  of vinyl all over again. Though, I started as a young teener with vinyl in the early '60s, and have continued all the way to the present. In 1961, I bought my first vinyl record and still have it. "Walk-Don't Run" by the Ventures. 

Being sort of a tinker-er was not why I decided to spend literally thousands and thousands on my multiple vintage tonearms, expensive MC cartridges and loads on second cleaning equipment to prove that vinyl is better. Purchasing the 7000 records I own and buying more every month is not the way to save for retirement either. 

As a dedicated listener of many decades I too bought into the 'new' tech. and back in 1990, I bought into CD, I even own decent machines, 5 cd players in fact that were considered excellent though not high-end and still I was not satisfied with the sound quality although 28 years ago, it was good fun and a pleasure to use. But, even then in 1990, almost 8 years since it's first introduction to the masses, I felt my ears weren't lying to me, something was missing when listening to CD as compared to vinyl.

 I set-up my present main system with 3 turntables, 2 tape decks and two CD players and an FM tuner and all inputs are selectable at the turn of a knob. So, switching back and forth to any of the mentioned input sources is available for A/B companions which I have done enough times to necessitate shutting the CD player off and quickly switching back to phono. I even have had listening guests ask me to do the same as they felt the vinyl was so much more invitingly warm and satisfying 'real' sounding to their ears.

A few newer vinyl discs that I purchased were cut from CD originals and not master-tapes, and this is very noticeable in play-back.  On a system that is as resolving and revealing as mine is, it's noticeable and again, even during casual listening, a guest or two, who some real listening experience can also pick it out the differences. 

With CD one simply pops a plastic disc into a flimsy plastic draw and then hopes for the best. The sound emanating out of any CD player was made to sound just like the designer who designed it to their own tastes and this is after the recording engineers and mastering folks have already done their jobs with the chosen medium. The listener has no say in the actual sound quality because the designer and mechanical CD player is deciding for the listener whereas with vinyl, you tailor the sound quality as you prefer.

With vinyl, one can vary the sound with their choice of cartridge, tonearms, and turntable. Sound can also be adjusted by changing phono cables, platter mats, stylus tracking weight, and VTA. With all of these parameters and flexibility, the listener decides what quality they enjoy best suited to their liking, whereas with CD, you take what you get, and cannot do any choosing on your behalf. Whatever 'chip' your CD player has is what you're stuck with.

So, go ahead, pop in another CD and listen to someone else's, (designer's) perception of sound that you would be listening to according to their tastes.

Or, don't be lazy like you can be with a CD and custom arrange, set-up and enjoy the quality and sort of sound that you like best and that's easily adjustable and afforded with vinyl.

Otherwise, like I said, pop-in another disc and hope that you might like it. Remember, it was promised that CD was perfect and will last forever with perfect sound and that kind of talk was with-in the first few years. So, let's see 1982 was basically when CD came out,  two years ago the Hi-Fi press was saying CD is on the way out and for the last 10 years vinyl is living a insurgence with record sales higher than in the last 25 years. I'm left scratching my head.

In the last year or so, I've gotten into' jazz more than ever before, over 75% or more of what I bought is not, I repeat is not available on CD. And, many jazz re-releases are not being offered on CD. Go figure. Compounded by a major high-quality producer of CDs and SACDs is going out of business should confirm the rumors of its demise.

If you're an appreciator of a great system and quality reproduction of sound as I am, and as I learn from the best systems out there just like I always have done, you might surf the web looking to see and hear/read what the 'other-side' enjoys. Those who can afford the very best listening systems in creation use vinyl mostly.  So, for me,  it is immensely satisfying to see the lion's share of better systems that are using and are centered around vinyl usage.   

One word of caution; the best vinyl reproduction will not come while using an AR-XA table in its original form regardless of what the fans may think, feel, or believe as up-grades are required to do so. I know many here are content with it though and that's all right too of course but, is not the best one can do by any stretch. For casual, not really critical listening it's fine to a degree however, critical listening as is generally done with higher quality systems are using vinyl as the chosen medium.

Memory has it in my world, that I  wrestled with my new XA for two years in 1972,  gave-up and never looked back except in memory saying to myself; "gee, remember when you thought that was the best there is?". In actuality, it's just too 'bare-bones' in its construction and simplistic design just as Ed Villchur intended it to be in its design and low cost. Back in 1972 it pushed many lower quality tables aside and even put mid-stream turntables to shame and rightly so though, it wasn't able to match the upper echelon of better tables either as that wasn't its intended purpose so, please let's stop pretending that it is,  that's 46 years ago in my experience and it won't change by will-power or fondness for it. 

Even though the tables I use are vintage and ranged in costs back then in 1972 from $260. to $360. w/o tonearms, at the time the XA was costing  $78. so there is no comparison.  Again, go figure, it's easy to see. Economical items are built to a certain price point and rest assured in most every case with a cheaper product one can only approach the more costly and better made items for their better sound quality.

And finally,  please stay on topic, as advised (sarcasm to poster above).

* Note: All that was required in this post is as I already said in my first two opening sentences when I started this post.

* And DavidR, thanks for being 'real' in your comment. At least with a vinyl disk, if it's a poor or crappy pressing or damaged,  you can read the liner notes in normal daylight with-out reading glasses. You could also return it claiming it's warped or scratched and get a refund.

FM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frank, many CDs are overly compressed and sound horrible. ALL of my Gary Moore music is on CD and everyone is hard to listen to. I bought a Yaqin tube buffer and upgraded the tubes and coupling caps. I have to use that to take the 'edge' off. Others are just bad recordings. Period. I have only one vinyl record that has SQ issues and I bought that recently. I would have taken it back but I could never find the sales slip. I think my son had it with his stuff when we went into the house with everything. Oh well. I prefer my jazz on vinyl but all other music can be any media. My 18 y.o. son prefers vinyl for his genre of music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, I enjoy your candor and also fully agree with you re: cd's. I only have one Gary Moore vinyl disk from 1991 and I think it sounds fine.

I also agree regarding the 'jazz' music. I've immersed myself into loads of it lately. Vinyl is the only way to listen correctly and is period correct.

SACD would be the only area I would scale up to from CD and honestly with all that I've put into my system in these last few years, that won't be likely. I've read about a new medium similar to CD only much better is being spoken of at hifi shows and in the press. Do I care?  Maybe, a little.

I'm curious about what you prefer in jazz as I must admit, I'm still learning though let me drop a few names for ya.

Bill Evans, Art Blakey, Oscar Peterson, Chet Baker, Basie, Ornette Coleman, Ahmad, Ray Brown, Lee Morgan, Coltrane, Hank Mobley, Cannon Ball and Nate Adderley, Louie Bellson, Miles, Brubeck, to mention a scant few, vocals, my girl Ella, Etter, Kitt, etc.
Male: Joe Williams, etc. though not many around.  I'm at a loss for names rite now.  I find I'm liking 'Bop' more than the earlier jazz circa 1920-30's. Late '40's, and '50s seem to be where I dwell at the moment.

I will add that much of the stuff I'm buying is on original Verve and labels from back then along with many as of late re-prints. Also, I wouldn't be able to become so hog-wild in my enjoyment and collecting unless I had the ultrasonic' cleaning regiment that I delved into head first about a year ago. A lot of what I find especially in older jazz has been mis-handled and abused many years ago. Sometimes I'm forced to do some 'mercy-listening' just for the music's experience to say, I have. It's because much of this stuff is almost un-obtainable any longer and certainly not available on CD.

I'm anxious to hear about your favorites also.

Oh, I'm sorry I'm not speaking about cabinet sanding, pot scrubbing, 'caps', grill clothe types and low power amps and improper speaker placement. That seems to be lacking in my dialog here, forgive me. I'm not new to the world of AR speakers, in fact I may be a dinosaur? But, at least I've been fossilized with high-power and LST's.

Speaking of music, hasn't been cast aside, and it seems to be neglected. The saw dust from sanding and oxidation from those 'pots' must've altered my thinking.

FM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tysontom said:

This is definitely not "new-old stock," but rather an AR-XA (or TA) that "has a box with it."  Most responsible AR Turntable owners held on to the boxes.  What this seller is trying to do it convince potential buyers that this turntable has never been used and has been in the box forever.  One look at the way the inserts are arranged on top of the platen (obviously, the seller wasn't familiar with the way the turntable packed into the original box), and it's clear that the turntable has definitely been out of the box. 

This is my old AR two-motor turntable, and how one should look if well preserved.  I displayed this one at the AR "40th Birthday Party" in New York in 1994, too.  The pictures below were taken a couple months ago, the turntable was build around 1963.

AR-XA_2-Motor_Tyson_003.thumb.JPG.7fa6987f9d1e1050dbf54df4c061850e.JPG

AR-XA_2-Mtr_002.thumb.jpg.5aa2be081f9ffe6131f3375e3e7c5a98.jpg

AR-XA_2-Mtr_006.thumb.jpg.130cd5c721c5671a2a72c8269641d8b2.jpg

AR-XA_2-Motor_Tyson_005.thumb.JPG.4bea724b11da029c60bee07a4cca9228.JPG

--Tom Tyson

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hey Tom,

Considering the beautiful condition of your Allison Ones, it’s no surprise to see your XA preserved and displayed so beautifully!

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...