Allison Acoustics to become Allison Acoustics International

[tysontom]

I've posted this "Allison" message in the AR pages because of everyone's familiarity with AR-great, Roy F. Allison. When RFA left AR in 1972, after thirteen years of service and a huge contribution to the innovation of AR products, he soon founded Allison Acoustics in Natick, Massachusetts. Products from the new company continued in the same heritage of AR, including such things as wide dispersion, smooth integrated power response and very low distortion. Some years later, Allison Acoustics succumbed to insolvency, but was later resurrected by a group of investers under the leadership of David Faulkner. In the recent past, this new company also struggled to survive, but a Bernie Bottum, a well-known businessman in the audio field, has licenced the Allison name and intellectual property from David Faulkner to form a new group, Allison Acoustics International.

Allison Acoustics' name and intellectual property will be licensed to businessman Bernie Bottum, a long-time successful entrepreneur with several companies in the industry (such as BIC). Bottum has put together a very competent team of engineers, cosmetic designers, marketing personnel and a large manufacturer of speaker products in China with whom he has previous experience. The name of the new company will be Allison Acoustics International. A large multi-product distributor in the US will handle sole distribution of the new products from Allison, mainly consisting of home-theatre products and the limited-production "Signature Series" speakers, whose design will be subject to final approval by Roy Allison. The future looks bright for Allison Acoustics!

Now if we could only find someone to do the same thing with Acoustic Research!

--Tom Tyson

[mluong303]

Hi, Tom

Why Not You? You certainly have all the in depth knowledge of the AR speakers design concept and requirement etc. Along with your experience and connection in the fields, you certainly can pull everything and get them connected together and come up with a pair of U.S.A. Limited Edition AR-3a as the 50th Anniversary AR speakers to begin with... I am signing up for the serial # 003 and 004.

I wish Mr. Roy Allison will write an updated article on the tweeter, midrange and woofer he had involved and improved for the Limited Edition Allison One speakers, hopefully illustrations, pictures of the old vs. new drivers along with specification and measuring graphs will be included. The drivers I saw on the new Allison One speakers look just like the old stock drivers from the Allison Acoustics AL-130 speakers and the woofers have over sized dust cap on them (They still being painted with sticky butyl latex! Is this necessary with today¡¯s material and technology?). Are there really new drivers being made for the Signature series speakers that cost US$5000+ a pair? The polish and tinted job looks so much like the cherry AR-303 cabinet!

Minh Luong

[tysontom]

>Hi, Tom

>

>Why Not You? You certainly have all the in depth knowledge of

>the AR speakers design concept and requirement etc. Along with

>your experience and connection in the fields, you certainly

>can pull everything and get them connected together and come

>up with a pair of U.S.A. Limited Edition AR-3a as the 50th

>Anniversary AR speakers to begin with... I am signing up for

>the serial # 003 and 004.

>

>I wish Mr. Roy Allison will write an updated article on the

>tweeter, midrange and woofer he had involved and improved for

>the Limited Edition Allison One speakers, hopefully

>illustrations, pictures of the old vs. new drivers along with

>specification and measuring graphs will be included. The

>drivers I saw on the new Allison One speakers look just like

>the old stock drivers from the Allison Acoustics AL-130

>speakers and the woofers have over sized dust cap on them

>(They still being painted with sticky butyl latex! Is this

>necessary with today¡¯s material and technology?). Are there

>really new drivers being made for the Signature series

>speakers that cost US$5000+ a pair? The polish and tinted job

>looks so much like the cherry AR-303 cabinet!

>

>Minh Luong

>

Minh, thanks for your vote of confidence! However, I can only imagine what it would cost to put together the necessary production tooling and wherewithal to make the Limited Edition AR-3a speakers you mention. The speakers might cost a $million each just to break even, and I only know a few people, such as yourself, willing to pay that kind of money. Besides, that’s what Ken Kantor did in the early 90s with the AR-303a -- a sort of limited-edition, modern-day AR-3a. The 303 might not have the retro-look, but it corrected most of the perceived short-comings of the AR-3a (which, in my opinion, are relatively few). Besides, why don’t we wait for Pete B to “re-invent” the AR technology with some new speakers of his own? He has already told us what is wrong with AR design, so we should wait for the other foot to drop. In the meantime we can continue to restore what we now have.

Roy Allison is well into his 70s, and not likely to get back into the day-to-day routine of loudspeakers. He made his mark -- many times over -- at AR and Allison, and he really doesn’t have much to prove at this point. The problem with any of the modern-day Allison drivers had to do with quality control, and the new manufacturing will likely correct those issues. From what I understand, the biggest thrust of the new company will be in surround-sound speakers, with small emphasis on the Signature Series (such as the Allison: One and so forth), whose final design will still be reviewed by Roy Allison. The butyl-rubber treatment is excellent for damping and resonance-suppression, and has a great deal to do with the Allison speaker’s very linear response.

--Tom Tyson

[Pete B]

Hi Tom,

This is interesting. Does this mean that the most recent Allison run by Faulkner will shut down? I would think so.

Who holds the rights to the AR name today? I'd think that there'd be more interest in the AR name than Allison but it might be much more difficult to buy rights to the AR name.

Perhaps Bernie Bottom would want to resurect AR in addition to Allison?

"Re-invent"? all I'm thinking of at this point is fixing things I see in the designs that need fixing from my perspective, and I'd like to see the designs modernized in some ways.

I do, on the other hand, have several ideas (audio and digital systems) that are new and I believe worth patenting. However, it is clear that in these days especially, a corporation that is able to defend patents is required to make it worth developing them. Interested parties are welcome to contact me.

Is there talk of reviving AR? Do you think the audio market would be stronger for reissues of the classics or more for improved versions? The high end products are usually offered to prove that they can keep up or advance the current state of the art, then the home theater products are the bread and butter to provide more revenue to keep the company going.

Pete B.

>

>Minh, thanks for your vote of confidence! However, I can only

>imagine what it would cost to put together the necessary

>production tooling and wherewithal to make the Limited Edition

>AR-3a speakers you mention. The speakers might cost a

>$million each just to break even, and I only know a few

>people, such as yourself, willing to pay that kind of money.

>Besides, that’s what Ken Kantor did in the early 90s with the

>AR-303a -- a sort of limited-edition, modern-day AR-3a. The

>303 might not have the retro-look, but it corrected most of

>the perceived short-comings of the AR-3a (which, in my

>opinion, are relatively few). Besides, why don’t we wait for

>Pete B to “re-invent” the AR technology with some new speakers

>of his own? He has already told us what is wrong with AR

>design, so we should wait for the other foot to drop. In the

>meantime we can continue to restore what we now have.

>

>Roy Allison is well into his 70s, and not likely to get back

>into the day-to-day routine of loudspeakers. He made his mark

>-- many times over -- at AR and Allison, and he really doesn’t

>have much to prove at this point. The problem with any of the

>modern-day Allison drivers had to do with quality control, and

>the new manufacturing will likely correct those issues. From

>what I understand, the biggest thrust of the new company will

>be in surround-sound speakers, with small emphasis on the

>Signature Series (such as the Allison: One and so forth),

>whose final design will still be reviewed by Roy Allison. The

>butyl-rubber treatment is excellent for damping and

>resonance-suppression, and has a great deal to do with the

>Allison speaker’s very linear response.

>

>--Tom Tyson

>

>

[Pete B]

>>Hi, Tom

The speakers might cost a

>$million each just to break even, and I only know a few

>people, such as yourself, willing to pay that kind of money.

... snip

>

>--Tom Tyson

Tom wants a $million, I'll do it for $100K and I'm not cheap, ha, ha.

Noticed a while back that the AR name was bought by Audiovox, just noticed that they still hold it. Don't think they're about to do anything like my ForA-9 concept.

Pete B.

[Guest daveshel]

>Noticed a while back that the AR name was bought by Audiovox,

>just noticed that they still hold it. Don't think they're

>about to do anything like my ForA-9 concept.

>

>Pete B.

>

They seem to be using the brand to market accessories - cables and such. Sadly, they own Advent as well.

[Pete B]

>>Noticed a while back that the AR name was bought by

>Audiovox,

>>just noticed that they still hold it. Don't think they're

>>about to do anything like my ForA-9 concept.

>>

>>Pete B.

>>

>

>They seem to be using the brand to market accessories - cables

>and such. Sadly, they own Advent as well.

I'd like to see them market a modernized vertical AR-3a, with an up to date woofer that would allow it to work in HT without a sub. Really, all I would retain from the 3a is 12" woofer, .75" tweeter, air core inductors, and that it is a 3-way with higher order crossovers. 4 ohm would be nice but seems 6 is the standard for HT.

I think an Advent with the performance of the stacked large Advents would also work in HT without a sub.

These should be voiced to work well in both HT and high end audio applications, and should be bargain priced.

Something like the ForA-9 as an expensive flagship would demonstrate that newer technology/thinking is being applied.

Anybody have connections at Audiovox?

Pete B.

[Steve F]

While it’s nice to have a full-range speaker that “doesn’t require a sub,” the DD decoders built into receivers and pre-amp/processors prevent you from doing what you think you’d like to do.

When using HT equipment, during the initial setup procedure the equipment will display an on-screen menu of various setup options. One of these options is “Subwoofer Y/N,” whereby the user (you) are supposed to tell the equipment whether or not you’ll be using a satellite/subwoofer system or full-range speakers with no subwoofer.

Now, lots of us are justifiably proud of our expensive, sophisticated speakers, and their great bass response. We feel we don’t need a subwoofer for home theater—we’ve got AR-9’s or stacked 11’s, or what-have-you.

Ah, but what virtually no one realizes (because the electronics manufacturers don’t put it in their lit or manuals) is that Dolby requires the electronics manufacturer to adjust the level of the “.1” LFE track depending on whether you selected subwoofer Yes or No.

Remember, Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtracks contain regular full-range sound, including “normal” bass such as music on the 5 channels. The .1 LFE (Low Frequency Effects) channel contains the really low bass such as the starship’s engines rumbling, or the Deathstar exploding or Arnold driving his semi into a bridge column. When you select “Subwoofer—Yes, Center Channel—normal, Surround speakers—small, Front speakers—small,” the receiver gathers up ALL the bass (usually below 80Hz, or depending on where you set the x-over if yours is adjustable) from the 5 regular channels and all the bass from the .1 channel and sends it to the sub.

Here’s where it gets tricky, so play close attention:

If you select “Front speakers—Large, Subwoofer—No,” thinking that you’ll send all the bass to your super-duper main speakers, you’re going to outsmart yourself. Dolby REQUIRES that the electronics manufacturers REDUCE the LFE level by 10 dB when that signal is folded in with the rest of the signal and sent to the main speakers instead of a separate sub.

Dolby’s reasoning is that most of the time, main speakers without a sub will have inferior bass response to main speakers with a sub. It’s a precaution on their part to try to prevent the user from overdriving their 10” 2-way main speakers. It makes sense in most setups. But you will not get the same LFE level if you select “Sub—No” than you would have if you used a separate subwoofer.

Steve F.

[Steve F]

I spoke to the people involved with the new Allison at CES a few days ago. There are still many, shall we say, "complications" to be cleared up before this project gets up and running.

To use a basketball analogy, this is a low-percentage shot. But good players do sink 25-footers on occasion, so I'm rooting for them.

Steve F.