8 Ohms tweeter, Pots or L-Pads, AR-3a Limited

[mluong303]

There is an article interviewing Mr. Edgar Villchur and Mr. Roy Alison by David Lander in the January 2005 issue of Stereophile magazine to Celebrate AR 50th Birthday.

There is no question that the Woofer used in AR-3a speaker is a 12" woofer even though the paper cone is smaller than the standard 12" woofer such as the one used in JBL speakers and many others. However if you try to buy foam surrounds to repair your AR-3a woofers and try to ask for 12" surround kit, most likely you will get the standard JBL 12" foam surrounds which will be too large for your AR-3a woofers. On the other hand if you asking for 11" foam surround kit, you will get a good fit kit to repair your AR-3a woofers. It is actually 11" foam surround vs 12" foam surround issue and not 11" woofer vs 12" woofer argument!

[mluong303]

40 years of Stereophile: The Hot 100 Products by John Atkinson,

Stereophile, November, 2002

[#97]: AR 3A loudspeaker

(No Stereophile review.) It may have been ugly, colored, and with rolled-off highs, but the sealed-box 3A defined the "Boston Sound" and helped establish the American speaker industry. I never liked it, but I can't ignore it. Pretty much the same drive-units were used in AR's multidirectional LST, which years later was to inspire Mark Levinson's Cello speakers. I really didn't like the LST. ... but Why?

[dynaco_dan]

Hi there for 2005

My guess is you probably didn't have a pair of LST's to truly test drive in your home.

You would have needed at least a Crown DC300A or bigger amp to get them to open up. An equivalent or larger clean amp would have been ok.

I owned AR3a's when I had a pair of loaner LST's for a weekend when they were new.

I enjoyed the 3a's very much, but had the LST bug, not budget.

I felt at that time that they were twice the value of 3a's.

They were twice the price here at that time retail.

This was using an AR amp even.

Ok story time.

Word back then was a local pop group would do their recording in a local studio and take the master tapes home to listen to.

They, at least once blew out all of their LST tweeters.

They ended up with EPI Towers because they couldn't blow them up at the volume levels they were using.

With the LST's, I saw only one midrange driver blown, the rest were all or most all of the tweeters. I don't remember AR ever declining a warantee at that time. Mind you, the speakers we repaired were already in the hands of the owners before the paperwork ever reached AR. That was pre-fax and email. I'm sure there was probably a memo from AR advising us to take it easy.

There was a memo advising about the wasted warantee charges for replacing only the blown fuses. There was a considerably reduced output from the speakers even with the fused blown.

This is 2005 trivia.

Enjoy and happy 2005.

>40 years of Stereophile: The Hot 100 Products by John

>Atkinson,

>Stereophile, November, 2002

>

>[#97]: AR 3A loudspeaker

>(No Stereophile review.) It may have been ugly, colored, and

>with rolled-off highs, but the sealed-box 3A defined the

>"Boston Sound" and helped establish the American speaker

>industry. I never liked it, but I can't ignore it. Pretty much

>the same drive-units were used in AR's multidirectional LST,

>which years later was to inspire Mark Levinson's Cello

>speakers. I really didn't like the LST. ... but Why?

[dynaco_dan]

Hi there for 2005

My guess is you probably didn't have a pair of LST's to truly test drive in your home.

You would have needed at least a Crown DC300A or bigger amp to get them to open up. An equivalent or larger clean amp would have been ok.

I owned AR3a's when I had a pair of loaner LST's for a weekend when they were new.

I enjoyed the 3a's very much, but had the LST bug, not budget.

I felt at that time that they were twice the value of 3a's.

They were twice the price here at that time retail.

This was using an AR amp even.

Ok story time.

Word back then was a local pop group would do their recording in a local studio and take the master tapes home to listen to.

They, at least once blew out all of their LST tweeters.

They ended up with EPI Towers because they couldn't blow them up at the volume levels they were using.

With the LST's, I saw only one midrange driver blown, the rest were all or most all of the tweeters. I don't remember AR ever declining a warantee at that time. Mind you, the speakers we repaired were already in the hands of the owners before the paperwork ever reached AR. That was pre-fax and email. I'm sure there was probably a memo from AR advising us to take it easy.

There was a memo advising about the wasted warantee charges for replacing only the blown fuses. There was a considerably reduced output from the speakers even with the fused blown.

This is 2005 trivia.

Enjoy and happy 2005.

>40 years of Stereophile: The Hot 100 Products by John

>Atkinson,

>Stereophile, November, 2002

>

>[#97]: AR 3A loudspeaker

>(No Stereophile review.) It may have been ugly, colored, and

>with rolled-off highs, but the sealed-box 3A defined the

>"Boston Sound" and helped establish the American speaker

>industry. I never liked it, but I can't ignore it. Pretty much

>the same drive-units were used in AR's multidirectional LST,

>which years later was to inspire Mark Levinson's Cello

>speakers. I really didn't like the LST. ... but Why?

[mluong303]

The quote is straight from the Stereophile magazine and the question "but Why?" is for the editor John Atkinson himself? I feel he owe his readers an explanation and at the same time educate the rest of us what he feels are wrong with the AR-3a, AR-LST and Cello Amati speakers from the point of view of a Hi End Audio gears reviewer and as a Chief Editor of a magazine. Never under estimate what HiFi toys John Atkinson can or will be able to own? All he has to do is a single phone call away without have to check on his bank account like anyone else. For your information the Amp that really made the AR-LST speakers sing is Phase Linear 700 by Bob Carver at the time.

Happy New Year and Have a Peaceful 2005...

[dynaco_dan]

Hi there

You may not have seen a previous trivia story of mine where I mentioned a friend with LST's and a Phase Linear 700.

He touched a ground cable without turning down the volume first and pulled a phono cable out later.

This was with the volume controls on the 700 full up.

One helluva transient to say the least.

A smile factor of 10/10.

Never blew a fuse but his girfriend was sitting right beside one speaker and she was teary eyed.

He still has this same setup.

I know I read somewhere, and it may have been from an Audio Amateur or Speaker builder article where a friend of the writer felt the 3a's should have somewhere around 2500 watts per channel.

Heavens knows what the LST's really needed to get off the real ground.

I listened to my loaners with my AR amp and a doctor and four Russian sailors enjoyed Simon and Garfunkles Cecelia at loud levels but they wanted it louder. It was getting foggy sounding so I didn't go the max.

We have several versions of the LST's out in the field, the original with the front wired tweeter and mids, two different rotary switch suppliers, the cap value change, the resistor add-on, from putty to foam gaskets and mounting the crossover from the rear to from the woofer opening.

I wonder, if at all, if any of these changes were audible?

Perhaps comparing the external wired drivers versus the internal wired drivers and if they were or weren't later ferrofluid models.

I just re-read a small Stereophile booklet where the Best Buys were listed for ? year.

The brief summary of the AR303 wasn't the most complimentary but then those of you who may own them may think they are the greatest.

It would be nice to hear from some owners of their opinions.

John A is in a unique position of having or had the opportunity to touch, and savour the very finest equipment available.

To all of us viewers who may own a pair of reasonable priced speakers, a small receiver and maybe a Panasonic Walkman CD player, using drug store connectors and cables, we can only read about the endless search for musical purity.

Read a review in Stereophile and see the cables, pre-amps, amps, room tuners, sand bags, wall braces and still the speakers are moved around inch by inch degree by degree.

I don't know of anyone that can afford the cables alone, nevermind the rest of the system.

Heavens to Betsy if you like the review of some $15,000.00 speaker system, you may need that $20,000.00 CD player because yours has a receding midrange ( like my hair ) and a slightly bloated bass when it was tested with those speakers.

You were happy with everything until you finished the review now you have a hankering for those other toys.

I remember Fabio was interviewed by Playboy, I believe years ago, he had closets full of interconnects.

Have a great year.

>The quote is straight from the Stereophile magazine and the

>question "but Why?" is for the editor John Atkinson himself? I

>feel he owe his readers an explanation and at the same time

>educate the rest of us what he feels are wrong with the AR-3a,

>AR-LST and Cello Amati speakers from the point of view of a Hi

>End Audio gears reviewer and as a Chief Editor of a magazine.

>Never under estimate what HiFi toys John Atkinson can or will

>be able to own? All he has to do is a single phone call away

>without have to check on his bank account like anyone else.

>For your information the Amp that really made the AR-LST

>speakers sing is Phase Linear 700 by Bob Carver at the time.

>

>Happy New Year and Have a Peaceful 2005...

[ar_pro]

The AR-3a (and the old Acoustic Research Company), represented a practical and cost-effective approach to quality musical reproduction that would be anathema to Stereophile-types like JA.

Despite their lip service claims of being "all about the music", the vast majority of these guys have spent *much* more money on equipment than discs.

Even in my college days of saving up for an AR turntable, amplifier, and 2ax speakers, most of my bux went toward LPs at Sam Goody's and concert tickets!

[mluong303]

"I think most people here would say that the Cello clone of the AR LST did not perform as well..."

Is there anyone in the Forum actually seen the Cello Amati speakers or heard how they sound like? Is there anyone actually had a chance to listen to the Cello Amati next to the AR-LST speakers to state the Amati did not perform well?

[soundminded]

Since I'm the one who posted it, I'll be the first to own up to the fact that I did not personally hear them for myself. And even if I did, unless I were able to do a side by side comparison with a well restored pair of LST,s it wouldn't be a valid comparison anyway. I posted what I said based on other people's unsubstantiated reports elsewhere and I think here as well. Did I go out on a limb and cut the branch off behind me with this statement? Did I go too far. Did I get someone's hackle's up who own's a pair of Amatis? Mabye. You sure have to be careful what you say on these bulleting boards. Sooner or later someone will take offense at practically anything.

[mluong303]

Acoustic Research has always been the favorite speakers of choice in Asia for many music lovers if they can afford them back in the ’70 mainly in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Vietnam follow by Korea and Japan later on. Japanese are more into JBL and Altec Lansing due to the higher sensitivity and higher impedance which make them more suitable for low wattages tube amps. Also “Size does matter” for showing off and to boost their Ego like Godzilla.

The most known AR speakers are the AR-3a and AR-LST speakers. Beside honestly reproduce the recorded music, owning a pair of AR-3a or AR-LST was a social status in the HiFi circle to the people around you. Having a pair of AR-3a or AR-LST was no difference than owning a pair of Cello or Wilson Audio’s Watt/Puppy in today’s standard. I don’t understand why the AR old timers are willing to make room for the people who spent $500 / $1200 in 1972 Dollars for a pair of AR-3a / AR-LST but have no tolerant for the new guys who spend money on Cello or Wilson Audio’s speakers?! There is no doubt in my mind the Cello and Wilson Audio speakers are over priced but if you have ever really listen to what they sound and see the built quality of these beautiful speakers. You should be Proud of these truly designed and made in the U.S.A. speakers the World is so crazy about.

Both Mark Levinson and David Wilson had work very hard to reach their goals and achieve their American Dream. AR-3a and AR-LST had been redesigned and modified to become the Cello Legend and Cello Amati speakers almost 20 years ago. It is a shame not a single AR Historian or supporter has any documentation of how Mark Levinson got the right to take over the designs and turn into these speakers under His Cello brand! Both the Legend and Amati sound awesome whether they are used as two channels with LP source or Home Theater setup with DVD. Personally, I have never read a single bad review about Cello speakers and if someone had spotted a negative review by all means copy and paste it in response to my post. I am looking forward to read it.

Hong Kong is the Country or City which had spent the most Money on American made High End audio gears and speakers to help boosting the U.S. economy. After 1997 Hong Kong was return to China and the Buying Power was taken away therefore many Hi End audio manufacturers around the world had turn “Belly Up” since! Both Cello and Wilson Audio have sold more gears to Asia than in the States. The Asian do have great respect about AR, Cello, Wilson, JBL, Infinity etc. and others made in the U.S.A. Goodies.

By the way, Cello is not the only company using AR-3a drivers. A Swiss company Rowen is another company who use AR-3a drivers to produce very expensive speakers as well.

Minh Luong

[mluong303]

Mark Levinson did not design the Cello Amati speaker ground up but instead borrow the AR-LST design that no one care about anymore 14 years after its introduction in 1972 and modified the crossover to his specification with the best parts available and improved the cabinet sturdiness. The tweeters, midranges and woofers were custom made for him by AR as well. I suspect in the beginning the testing of the Cello Amatis was done in the AR facility in MA. I need the AR Historians or Roy Allison inputs to fill in the blanks for me… Anything I don’t know, I will not make up Stories to mislead people.

Without Henry Kloss and Edgar Villchur, there would not be AR-1 and AR-3, without Chuck McShane and Roy Allison, there would not be AR-3a and AR-LST, and who would thought of there was actually room left to be improved for the best known Acoustic Research Laboratory Standard Transducer speakers until Mark Levinson came along 14 years later?! The Oak or Rosewood veneer Cello Amati speakers with AR drivers were made from 1986-1996. After that the Piano Lacquer Cello Amati Pro came along with Dynaudio drivers.

Here are pictures of the Cello double Amatis and AR-3a Limited prototype sent to Hong Kong in 1990 with real wood veneer in Blond finish. The actual production AR-3a Limited was walnut vinyl! The Rowen R-2 speakers were made in Switzerland with AR-3a tweeters and midranges along with modified AR 8” woofers.

Minh Luong

[galleria]

>Mark Levinson did not design the Cello Amati speaker ground

>up but instead borrow the AR-LST design that no one care about

>anymore 14 years after its introduction in 1972 and modified

>the crossover to his specification with the best parts

>available and improved the cabinet sturdiness. The tweeters,

>midranges and woofers were custom made for him by AR as well.

>I suspect in the beginning the testing of the Cello Amatis was

>done in the AR facility in MA. I need the AR Historians or Roy

>Allison inputs to fill in the blanks for me?Anything I don’t

>know, I will not make up Stories to mislead people.

>

>Without Henry Kloss and Edgar Villchur, there would not be

>AR-1 and AR-3, without Chuck McShane and Roy Allison, there

>would not be AR-3a and AR-LST, and who would thought of there

>was actually room left to be improved for the best known

>Acoustic Research Laboratory Standard Transducer speakers

>until Mark Levinson came along 14 years later?! The Oak or

>Rosewood veneer Cello Amati speakers with AR drivers were made

>from 1986-1996. After that the Piano Lacquer Cello Amati Pro

>came along with Dynaudio drivers.

>

>Here are pictures of the Cello double Amatis and AR-3a Limited

>prototype sent to Hong Kong in 1990 with real wood veneer in

>Blond finish. The actual production AR-3a Limited was walnut

>vinyl! The Rowen R-2 speakers were made in Switzerland with

>AR-3a tweeters and midranges along with modified AR 8?>woofers.

>

>Minh Luong

>

Hi everybody!

A very nice pictures! It brings my memory back especially the attachment #2 the AR 3a Limited and Rowen M2 sitting side by side. Those were my dream speakers at that time and the shame was when I got enough money to buy a pair of AR 3a Limited and then they all gone!

Actually, Rowen uses bipolar radiation design except model R1, R2 and R3. Also I always wonder Rowen borrows the technique from AR MGC (Magic speaker)......

Thanks for the pictures!

William

[mluong303]

Please Do Not reply with Quote if you would excuse me. It is a waste Web space and really give the readers a big headache trying to locate your post. Your reply is directly under my post so there will not be anything missing. If the readers wand to go back to my post he just has to scroll the screen up a touch to follow up on it.

Here are few Cello websites for getting to know Mark Levinson and his product lines.

http://www.marklev.com/cello/

http://www.celloseattle.com/ctdocs/prodser...s/speakers.html

http://www.exero.com/mastergate/secured/boytoys/levinson.htm

[galleria]

This is really a matter of great no importance! The system provides "reply with quote" as it is practical. It is nothing but just common.

William

[tysontom]

>

>Without Henry Kloss and Edgar Villchur, there would not be

>AR-1 and AR-3, without Chuck McShane and Roy Allison, there

>would not be AR-3a and AR-LST, and who would thought of there

>was actually room left to be improved for the best known

>Acoustic Research Laboratory Standard Transducer speakers

>until Mark Levinson came along 14 years later?!

Minh,

For clarification purposes, Henry Kloss had nothing to do with the AR-3. He left AR (1957) long before the AR-3 was introduced. He did the mechanical application and production work on the AR-1, but also had nothing to do with the design of that speaker. He did hand-build the first several AR-1s that were used in shows and so forth, including the AR-1 SN 0006 shown below. In addition, Chuck McShane (AR from 1965 to 1975 I believe) worked for Roy Allison, but did not design the AR-3a or the AR-LST. I'm not sure of his exact involvement, but both designs belonged to Allison.

There is no real evidence that the Cello Amanti and Pro Amanti were actual improvements over the original AR-LST. There may even have been a backward slide in true accuracy in the Pro version. They certainly were more handsome and cost several-times more than the original $600 for an AR-LST.

Note 2nd image below, AR-1 SN 0006, which is one of the first prototypes of the AR-1. Henry hand-built this speaker. The other image image is AR-1 SN 0074, which belonged to Ed Canby of *Audio.* Both of these speakers work fine, and are hopefully headed for museums.

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/user_files/493.jpg

AR-1 SN 0074 in Korina finish.

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/user_files/495.jpg

AR-1 SN 0006 in Lacquered Walnut finish. Hand-made grill panel still in place.

--Tom Tyson

[RoyC]

Since the above post I have had the opportunity and time to compare further, and discuss with others, the subject of AR-3a crossovers and pots.

>-The mid and tweeter are wired in phase with the woofer unlike

>the original.

This is probably not a true statement. Although it is alleged by some that the polarity of the mid and tweeter were reversed relative to the woofer, I have seen no evidence of this in the many AR-3a crossovers (1968 through 1974) I have personally examined. Confusion stems from the crossover components being mounted on the negative side of the circuit and the positive tweeter lead crossing over the negative lead under the electrical tape on the cabinet surface.

>The "15 ohm pots" of old actually kept the impedance of the

>mid and tweeter circuits low (below 4 ohms). It would be

>interesting to see how a 4 ohm l-pad were to work as a direct

>replacement for the pots without any of the above changes.

The old pots vary the impedance and crossover points somewhat as they are adjusted. I have been told that a conventional 8 ohm l-pad may work with the 3a midrange. Apparently the impedance of the circuit with the old pot at the optimal "dot" setting is similar to that of an 8 ohm l-pad in combination with the mid. It would therefore hold the crossover point at near the optimal level.

I'm not sure this would be the same for the 3a tweeter (DC 3ohms) however since it is usually operated near the full open position. The 8 ohm l-pad could raise the impedance and therefore lower the crossover point endangering a tweeter that does not have much crossover protection to begin with.

Conventional 8 ohm l-pads seem to work fine as pot replacements with the 8 ohm rated systems.

The fine print however is that one must use the small round 15 watt l-pads if you want to use the old holes. Anything else would be too big.

Roy C

[tysontom]

>

>This is probably not a true statement. Although it is alleged

>by some that the polarity of the mid and tweeter were reversed

>relative to the woofer, I have seen no evidence of this in the

>many AR-3a crossovers (1968 through 1974) I have personally

>examined. Confusion stems from the crossover components being

>mounted on the negative side of the circuit and the positive

>tweeter lead crossing over the negative lead under the

>electrical tape on the cabinet surface.

>

Clarification is in order regarding the dc-phase reversal on the AR-3/AR-3a speakers. In the early 1960s AR did reverse the AR-3 woofer and midrange polarity, and it was originally done by reversing the leads of the midrange driver under the tape on the top plate of the driver, etc. Later on, the magnetizer was reversed on the AR-3 magnets to make this change, and the wiring reverted to standard configuration. The AR-3a never had the dc-phase reversal as far as I can tell because the new crossover took care of this.

--Tom Tyson

[mluong303]

Hi, Tom

Thank you for the clarification. I did learn a great deal of classic AR History from you way before this Classic Speaker Forum, before Internet and certainly before Ebay arise. As I said to you long time ago, if I need a piece of original AR info, you would certainly be the first one to ask. No doubt.

I do know Henry Kloss had nothing to do with the AR-3. That was the reason I placed Edgar Villchur name after Henry Kloss to go with AR-1 and AR-3. It was not a matter of disrespectful to Mr. Villchur at all. According to what I had learned Mr. Villchur had no intension to get involved in the speaker business at all in the beginning. He just wanted to sell his invention to any bigger speaker company who is interested and willing to pay. But after a few No, who else but Henry Kloss to go full steam ahead and got the AR-1 project rolling into production line… I also realized Chuck McShane was working under Roy Allison and so did Bill Bush for Ken Kantor. I just have strong feeling for the people who had involved in the projects deeply but have tendency of being forgotten!

How much I love and into AR speakers, you pretty much got the full picture. I don’t have to repeat myself again. I had continued on buying and collecting AR speakers until late ‘90. I was insanely crazy about the AR-LST speakers for a long time and I end up purchased altogether 7 pairs. People who had bought them from me knew what kind of mint shapes they are in. I know quite well what they sound like and what they are capable of reproducing music. However Cello Amati speakers turn out to be my favorite. This is strictly my musical enjoyment preference which have nothing to do with the name Mark Levinson or the high price tag. All of my AR friends and buyers certainly realized my respect and craziness to AR is second to none. But don’t forget there is life after AR… Cello, Duntech(Dunlavy), Dynaudio, ATC, etc… There are simply so much to be learned from these fine speakers and their existence…

Nice AR-1 pictures, Oversea Ebay buyers just enjoy gutted the Altec 755A out to mate with their flea power tube amps and listen to vocals… If I had known this fact 30 years ago, I would have went down to all the train stations and yank out all the PA speakers ( the 755A ) before they were all being trashed into the Dumpster….

[RoyC]

Thanks for clearing this issue up Tom...

I also read some old posts regarding confusion over tweeter polarity.

The '3a tweeter's postive lead crosses from the left side of the dome to the right under the tape to meet the mid's positive lead at the shared, center surface mount terminals. They share the yellow wire inside the cabinet that connects to the + ("T") cabinet input via the pots.

The later back wired versions kept the postive lead/terminal on the left side, with the tweeter and mid each having their own yellow wire connected again to the + ("T") input terminals via the #2 pot posts.

I came across an AR-3a tweeter recently that had big red +'s (under the tape and paint) next to BOTH leads! Testing proved it was the left side lead that was crossed to the right (as always). The various marks on the old tweeters can be confusing.

Roy

[mluong303]

>There is no real evidence that the Cello Amanti and Pro Amanti

>were actual improvements over the original AR-LST. There may

>even have been a backward slide in true accuracy in the Pro

>version.

Hi, Tom

I forgot to ask you for your side of the story when you state the above statement. I just want to find out for myself if there is something I have missed for all these years? All I know was the Amati Pro were made in Connecticut in the Cello facility. AR had already gone from MA. So whatever performance test Cello was conducting for the Pro version and the modification of the crossover was strictly on their own...

I don't get upset because people dislike Cello Amati or people feel AR-3a/AR-LST are simply dinosaur speakers which belong to museum displayed! People just have to realize these well known speakers all had their glorious days and I do like both but when the time has come for me to depart them. I will sell them all without hesitations. After all HiFi is just a hobby which all of us are interested in and enjoy learning from each other to find out useful information and its historical facts to enrich our knowledge.

Minh Luong

[mluong303]

Here is the website for ATC if anyone is interested?

http://www.atc.gb.net/intro.html

[mluong303]

This may had been the earliest prototype AR-1 woofer?

[mluong303]

These double stacked Cello Amati Mk II speakers belong to an Audiophile in Hong Kong.

[mluong303]

These AR-9LSi are simply the Best looking classic AR speakers and the most impressive sounding speakers in my listening room for under $2000. I was about to sell them on Ebay and after I connected them to show off to a Friend who came over to purchased my personal pair of AR-3a speakers. My wife was totally impressed with the Realism and Dynamic these babies Godzilla are capable of Singing and Shaken the whole house. I toll Her just enjoy them for few more tracks and they will be History for $695 and we may have to deliver them for 150 miles round trip! She look at me seriously and said: “For that price, I will pay you keep them”. Now, That Sounds like “Real Music” to my ears. I had sold both pair of AR-9 and the original pair of AR-9LS and she didn’t said anything about them. I guess the all walnut veneer really make these AR-9LSi look like fine pieces of furniture than ordinary speakers. The bigger AR-9 speakers never sound well balance in my rooms and heavy bass alone is not the only thing I am listening to...

[mluong303]

I had sold AR-LST, AR-3a and AR-3 to Far East. I just sent the extra well packed speakers in U.S. ground delivery to California. The buyers have shipping companies to take over the crating onto shipment and deliver to Korea and Japan. For a pair of AR-LST speakers, they can cost more than $1000 for shipping charge and the Japanese and Korean collectors were not surprised and willing to pay for them. I am selling my last pair of AR-3a speakers. If you can make arrangement for shipping to over sea then contact me directly to work out the details. The bottom line is always find out the Grand Total including tax and duty fee at your end to see if your Dream Speakers really worth that much to you for personal use?! I am planning to sell my Cello Amati speakers soon so if anyone can afford the ultimate just give me a reasonable offer and settle for the Best.

Simply changing caps and wires will not change the AR-LST into Cello Amati speakers no matter how expensive the parts cost. Otherwise I would have done to all seven pairs of my AR-LST speakers long time ago and make some profit out of them. I had kept my last pair of AR-LST for a long while and almost fully rip them apart and convert to the Cello Amati. After carefully analyzed the concept, compare the parts and cabinets, I gave up the idea at the end and sold the 7th pair of AR_LST As-Is. $1200 a pair of AR-LST simply can not be compared to the $10000 a pair of Cello Amati. Life maybe unfair sometimes but very often you just have to accept the Reality at the end! Why wear a fake Rolex if you can not afford a real one?!

Minh Luong