Jump to content

What to do with my AR93s speakers?


Guest MPPurcell

Recommended Posts

Guest MPPurcell

Greetings, Doug,

I have gotten a lot of help on this forum, and I am sure you will too. One person you will want to hear from, I am sure, is Roy C who posts here. Roy has a pair of the 94s's (or maybe that is 94sx--slightly different).

>I've got a pair of AR 94's (don't have the double side-throw

>woofer config on the 93) and I appreciate your post and the

>replies that have followed.

I suspect the double side-throw woofers make a big difference on the bass, but Roy seems to like his 93s too. Have you looked inside yet to see if your mid-range has a separate acoustic box? If you do take out any batts of insulation, take photos as you go, to make sure you get them back in the same place as before.

>I'm trying to figure out if it's

>better to refoam or replace the drivers on my speakers. Got a

>separate post for that one under Mods, Tweaks & Upgrades.

>I'll be following your progress with the repaired drivers...

I have not received my woofers back yet, but Bill at Millersound says he tested them and they are fine. They just needed refoaming--22+ years of time was all that was needed to make them fall apart. I would highly recommend you contact Bill about refoaming yours-- 215-412-7700. Let him know I and many other posters here suggested you call.

>What did you decide to do with the dimpled tweeter? One of

>mine is in worse shape than yours, but I have to say I never

>noticed it sounding bad. Tried the straw trick but didn't get

>enough suction to fix it. Is the general consensus to leave

>good enough alone?

At this point, I am leaving mine alone. As you said, the dimple is small. Once I get everything running again, I will try to see if I can hear any difference in the tweeters. If not, I may leave well enough alone. My domes are quite hard, and hard to suck out. Roy has more experience with this, but it may have been with softer domes.

Best of luck with your refurb.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MPPurcell

>i had the same problem and i replaced the drivers with bravox

>and the tweeters with vifa and they sound great better then

>the factory

Let me get this straight--you have a pair of AR93s's, and you replaced all the drivers? Did you try refoaming the original 8" drivers first, to see what they would sound like? Maybe they would have sounded just as good by refoaming?

I just last night finished installing the refoamed 8" drivers in mine. I'll try to report tomorrow on the result so far, and give some more detail about how that process went.

By the way, did you get your 93s's new or buy them later, and what part of the country are you in? I am trying to figure out how widely the 93 was distributed.

Thanks,

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Michael i live in weymouth ma witch is 30 miles south of Boston, i bought the speakers new from the old lechmere store i belive they had a deal with ar to sell that model at a lower price. and i will agree with you comparing the speakers out there to day for our money we got a very good deal. i bought the drives from a company called parts express in ohio and the drivers were overstock from energy speakers in Canada and i paid $12 a woofer you can see the same drivers in speakers costing a few $1000 and the tweeters i replaced with some vifa tweeters that sound a lot better, bravox has started selling speakers here i bought some when i was in brazil for my car last year

I would recomed replacing the caps in the cross overs with newer ones it is not that much money and it improves the sound a lot if you need any help just email me back thanks tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bret the qualty of the original drivers were low end for ar on the 93s even though the design was good they saved money on the quality of the woofers and the magnets, the bravox woofers have a polymetal composite that are much better performence and sound clartiy. i love ar i have own the speakers from new and i also have the ar turntable that i cherish. i have had the oportunity to work for Appogee Acoustics for a few years and was able to listen to there High End systems to compare my modest one so when the chance came to replace the drivers i did. i will say for what is out there now you would have to spend a lot more then $300 dollars a pair then what we did for the ars back in the 80s tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i belive the over all sound of the cabnets have a lot to do with the original ar sound based on the 9s and the other speakers. Have you noticed a lot of the newer speakers using the sidefiring woofers in there design so the only thing i think i have changed is using a improved woofer composite then from 20 years ago and i have changed the caps in the crossovers. i did not have a choose since the woofers total disincrated on me being only paper. and i belive the midrange is a lot more defind and the bass is more tighter as for the tweetrs there is no comparison the vifa out perform the originals tweeters. remember the lechmere stores were selling these speakers at 250-300 dollars a pair you could not even get a pair of the 18s for much less

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>the qualty of the original drivers were low end for ar on the 93s even though the design was good they saved money on the quality of the woofers<

It's really important (to me) that you don't misunderstand my motives. Please read my comments with the understanding that I'm trying to pass-on to you the education other people here have been kind enough to give me. It's come slowly as many times I simply didn't accept what was said until I had experience of it.

So it's been an expensive education as well as a lengthy one; and it isn't over yet.

Whenever a speaker is designed it ends-up being a huge collection of compromises. Each of these compromises is dependent on all the others.

I wouldn't ever argue with you that AR's woofers were pretty, but I do take exception to their being called "low-end." They were what they were *because* they were more or less what the engineer who designed that system called-for, or what he had. Either way, *that* woofer was the *right* woofer for *that* design.

To give you just a hint of how incredibly important that one fact is, there are those of us on this forum who have tried to repair a driver only to find that we've accidently (or intentionally) added a tiny amount of weight to just the cone. When that driver is then tested, we find that we've altered an important parameter. Sometimes, at first, it appears the driver was improved - and it really might have been improved. The trouble is that the crossover was designed for the driver the way it was, before it was "improved."

So, maybe we can make a woofer go lower evidenced by reducing its resonant frequency. Sounds like an improvement at first, but then you realize that you've changed an output peak (at resonance: by definition). The original output peak was compensated-for, as much as possible, by the crossover. The crossover may have even *used* that peak in some way.

Now put the "improved" driver in the cabinet and instead of its output being more-or-less flat you have accidently added at least one peak and maybe created a trough. You may have added two peaks, or three.

And that's changing nothing but a few grams of weight on a cone.

If your old drivers were tested in the cabinets with no crossover attached to them, the combination of cabinet and driver would have a specific frequency response. Just so we have an example to work-with, let's say it is a woofer and let's say that it is at -3db at 30Hz, more or less flat from 60-150Hz and then it starts to rise in output until it is +6db at 500Hz. Let's also say that the "low midrange" is crossed-over to the woofers at 300Hz. And let's say that the low midrange driver is -3db at 300Hz and -12db at 200Hz.

The crossover's job, then is to smoothly shut the woofer up at its top frequencies while making the low midrange shut-up at just the correct rate to smoothly, smoothly merge with the woofer. You can see how that has to be done for a specific pair of drivers in a specific application in a known cabinet. The end result is something that's pretty smooth.

But if you change the midrange to one that is -3db at 200Hz and the woofer is -6db at 400Hz, the crossover doesn't "know" that and continues to do its job as though the original drivers were in the cabinet.

Well, that's not even right. The crossover interacts with the driver in ways that are dependent on the driver's specific voice coil and magnet assembly, the weight of the cone, the stiffness of the spider, the driver's specific impedance curve, and probably a host of other things I know nothing about.

So everything is relying on everything else and if you change something you have changed a lot of somethings you didn't mean to and have no way of discovering and no way of "fixing."

It's so critical that the system functions as a system, as engineered, that just changing the amount or type of "wadding" in the cabinet can create huge peaks and valleys in the frequency response. Just changing the fiberglass/polyester type or amount can change the "voice" of the system, particularly the "midrange" of the woofer.

I am not trying to say that you shouldn't like what you are listening to. What I am saying is that the speaker you have ended-up with is nothing like an AR-93 except they share some components and a cabinet. If you improved the original AR-93 design (meaning the speaker now objectively performs better than it did originally) it would be something of a miracle as the odds against it happening by chance are astronomically low given that you didn't re-engineer the crossover.

What has probably happened is that by changing everything in the cabinet you have introduced peaks and troughs that you like; but you and I cannot confuse "I like it!" with "This is objectively better!" Usually people confuse "brighter" with "better highs" and "thumpier" with "better bass." Really bad sound has sold more speakers in a showroom than I care to contemplate just because it is more "dramatic" at first listen.

Understand, too, that how pretty the drivers are has next-to-nothing to do with their performance. AR always had some of the absolute ugliest drivers and front baffles around while for many years producing speakers that were subjectively and objectively far, far superior to a lot of speakers that used "higher quality" parts. A bigger magnet does *not* make one woofer better than another, nor does it mean the woofer isn't better. A die-cast frame is *not* an indication of performance.

Ultimately the performance of the system is due to the engineering; making everything match everything else, compromising where it does the least damage, "settling" where the disappointment did not lead to a sonic problem.

When you change the driver to another one, whether that driver is better or not, the result is that you introduce problems into the system. Period. It's just the way it is.

I'm not the expert, I'm not an engineer, I don't have a political agenda. I'm just reporting.

By the way - I don't know about that specific 8" woofer, but you'll find that AR created an 8" woofer that was something of a legend.

Bret

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bret i dont pretend to be a expert, i love the ar speakers just as much as any one in this forum, but the fact is i had converations with a few enginers while i was working at Apoogge Acoustics and there ribbon speakers where well known in the Audio world and one person used to work at ar and i talked to him about change in the drives back then because i could notice the limitations in the 93s, if you remember the high priced ars had better composite woofers at the factory, so saying that using just a paper woofer and not a treated one with rubber or a polycomposite was that the only option for that cabnet design is not true they could of used a better woofer and tweeter but the bottom line is that they wanted to sell that as a budget speaker thats why they used the cloth sock and not a finished cabnet to cut cost. the price of the drivers back then were a lot more money then now. the over all sound did not change that much it just improved in the midrange is more detaled and the bass is more tighter, also the over all system has a lot to do with it if you are using solidstate or tube analog or digital. the main propose is to enjoy the music here is the link for bravox so you can see the quality of there workmenship www.bravoxaudio.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you are right. The main purpose of speakers is to enjoy the music. If you are doing that then all is well.

If while you were at Apogee, no less than George Short looked at the schematic and old production drawings and said, "You know, I think this speaker would sound better with ______ drivers," then I have to take his word for it since he IS an engineer and speaker designer.

It startled me the first time I ever saw the backside of an AR-90 woofer. The thing did not look like it could do what it was doing. AR should have been at least slightly embarrassed by the way their drivers looked. . . but I guess it made no difference.

So long as we don't start a "trend" with people who don't know what they are doing replacing drivers without-a-clue, I guess we're all safe and happy.

Bret

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bret thanks for the reply sorry to say if you asked about any other speaker at appogee they looked at you like it was trash even quads and other speakers in there price range, they were not nice to talk too unless it was there product but i did learn some stuff, also what ar models do you own, i use to have some old 3a i just have the cabnets under the house, i think the best ones ar made was the first model nines the big brothers to the 93 also did you think ther was much differance with the 93 and 94 thanks we shoud start a other thread if you want tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tim;

Cabinets under the house? MMMMMMMMM

Are you saying they have no home? MMMMMMMMMM

I certainly know where they would be kept warm and dry. MMMMMMMM

I just spotted this topic update and I enjoyed reading Bret's commentary.

Still learning after all these years.

I also am not an engineer or even remotely close to being one but a number of topics are of interest to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>also what ar models do you own

1w

pre-1970, 2ax

post - 1970, 2ax

10pi

14

17

9

and I suppose I inherited my dad's 3a's, but I don't have or listen to them.

But if you want to see a long list, there are several people on this forum who type a list for days.

Bret

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bret i just sat down and listen to some jazz i sound stage seems to be more forward and bigger. i am also using a sumiko FT3 arm on my AR Es1 Table so that could be a change compared to the stock arm when i first bought the speakers and i have a grado cartridge, i remmeber listing to a lot of music on the ar 93s and for my room you had to be postion right i a sweetspot in the middle to get the best sound. know i am able to move around the room more and get great sound also they sound a lot better using solidstate then the tube gear like dyanco that i had in the 80s. ps if any one in the boston area wants the ar3 cabnets just give me a reply tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MPPurcell

Sorry for my absence the last few days with this fascinating discussion--life intervened, including a falling tree next door, downed power line and voltage surges here. I've had my hands full. Fortunately, most of the surge protectors did their job and took the hit, and I am having to replace several of them. No computers or electronic equipment suffered, despite scary dimming and flashing of lights till we ran and hit the main house breaker! Anyway, it was probably better that the above discussion went on without me.

Vern, it might be worth considering fusing--and surge protecting--your whole house! :-)

While some of what Tim is saying sounds at least possible, there are several things, without any great technical expertise, I am having a hard time understanding. I am willing to believe that certain things about the design of the AR93s were done more economically than before, to get a better price point. The biggest is the use of the sock, which left only a very small piece of finished wood veneer at the top of the cabinet, but it's a brilliant design that actually produced a stunning look which to my mind doesn't really look cheap. And the cabinet construction is still hefty and solid to be sure--no skimping there. I am not so sure about the quality of the drivers being "less" either. As Bret said, they would win no beauty contests. The metal is discolored and soft; the magnets, however, are quite significant. Other than the surrounds, none of the paper on my cones or spiders (on six 8" drivers) was at all in bad condition. They were excellent in fact, and only the foam surrounds were replaced.

I appreciated Bret's analysis. The main question I have has to do with the listening comparisons. Over the 20+ years I have owned my speakers, it is VERY hard to remember their gradual change and deterioration and exactly what they sounded like when new. (Even the listening sources have changed.) So when you listen with new drivers, unless you have already repaired the original drivers to like-new condition, I am not sure you will have a fair way of comparing what you are hearing to what the speakers were meant to sound like or were when new. Also, you mentioned changing other equipment in the meantime, so it would be even harder to have a fair comparison. This is why I am taking things one step at a time--I want the best chance to tell any differences.

The part of what you did, Tim, that is most intriguing to me is changing the tweeters. I can believe that might make an improvement in the clarity and presence of sound and possibly have less chance of interfering with original balances, with a recently engineered quality tweeter that is a good match. But I would want to hear them side by side. The tweeter might even account for most of the improvements you hear. But I think it would be hard to beat the sound produced by the midrange drivers in this design. Maybe some day I will get back to Boston, look you up and have a listen to your 93s's. I am certainly curious.

I will try to post later Friday the results of my own foam replacements and listening tests.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MPPurcell

I could simply say they sound great, and that's true, but more detail is more interesting--the way I got there which wasn't entirely a straight path, the questions that arise as one compares results, and what one really notices after a rebuild. How to evaluate?

Listening itself is a complex and tough discipline. How does one ascertain any kind of objectivity? Obviously there is going to be subjectivity, and that's important, but certain things have got to be at least somewhat objective as one compares different speakers, or compares before-and-after repairs or mods. I have noticed that audiophile reviewers often cite the music they are listening to when they review equipment, particularly speakers. I never realized how important this is until I tried to assess the changes and the finished product. Different music, different composers, different recording engineers and recording quality all affect one's impression of the speakers. For example, I find Brahms created a very complex sound which can be difficult to reproduce in a satisfying way. On the other hand, I notice a lot of reviews refer to the Nora Jones CD, which is very up front and present, making for easy comparisons. I also found it was fun to listen to a recording of Rhapsody in Blue, a piece which has almost everything--the opening slide of the clarinet, great brass, sweet strings, cheeky bite and of course the very dynamic piano Gershwin wrote for. You want your speakers to make that piece really live as a whole, and my AR93s's now do that.

To back up a bit, I can't say enough about dealing with Bill at Millersound, though I know he has already received plenty of rave reviews here. If you are thinking of sending out for refoaming, do talk to him. His work quality, pricing and service are all great. The six speakers all looked great when they came back. I mounted both mids first, and then the two side-firing woofers on one speaker. However, when I went to test the acousitc suspension, it worked fine when I pushed one speaker in--you could see the opposite one immediately pop out, then recede. But when I pushed on the other, my first inkling of a problem was when the other cone did not move! When I went back to the first cone, I realised it was scraping somewhere. I pulled this woofer out and phoned Bill, who answered the phone on Saturday afternoon. I had visions of having to ship it back across the country to him.

Bill knew right away what the problem was, explained it to me, and told me how to fix it myself. He said they were all moving well when they left the shop, but in shipment with boxes getting tossed around and the magnets being so heavy, and the basket metal so soft, that the magnet and driver coil sometimes will move and could start scraping. He had me look at the magnet, where I could see the difference in spacing between the magnet and the basket on one side from the other. He explained how to use a screwdriver and lift one side of the magnet slightly and shift it (because the metal is soft and it moves fairly easily). I used a piece of wood like a popsicle stick to protect the basket when prying. As I gradually straightened the magnet, I found I was able to push on the cone in various spots and locate exactly which point it was still rubbing, and therefore where I needed to move the magnet a little more.

After I got it just right, I mounted the driver again (it floated fine now and responded to a push from the opposing cone, and I checked the two drivers for the other speaker before mounting them. When I got everything together, I connected them and put on some music. I soon noticed at moderately loud volumes, there began to be a slight distortion, which I located as coming from one of the other woofers. I pressed strategically on different parts of the cone, and eventually removed it and sure enough found this one was slightly out of line. Finally, I got everything right and assembled, and all the cones performed fine on initial listening tests. I pulled on the cloth sock, mounted the base stands and stood the speakers right side up. Then I sat back and started to listen.

My first real listen was a little disappointing. They actually sounded kind of raucous. I remembered hearing about a break-in period, but I couldn't help wondering at that moment if I could have spent my repair money more wisely. After letting them play for about an hour and a half, though, the sound started to change. It kept changing, so I kept listening, for several days, and as I said I had to keep trying different music. I also realized I had to try different positionings from the wall and cabinets they were near. (To show just how tricky all this listening is, around the second day I realized someone else in the house had pushed in the high-filter button and the loudness button on the preamp, which of course changed everything.) Finally, I got everything set flat and optimally positioned.

At this point, with some recordings, the sound was glorious. I became much more critical of audio engineers and performers on others--I could hear things I don't remember ever hearing, and it wasn't always good. I was of course amazed at the amount of bass I was hearing--I could barely remember hearing it like that before. Not booming either, but beautifully smooth. The mids too are very impressive, the highs not exaggerated, though I suppose a real high-end speaker might produce cleaner highs. What really impressed me and where they really shine, though, is reproducing something like a brass section from Rhapsody in Blue and other symphonic material. Brass tends to have a full tonal range from lows to mid to high. This seems very clear, present and accurate now.

Well, sorry for carrying on for so long. I am one happy puppy--and I haven't even played with capacitors yet. I am wondering what comes with that step. I am already pretty satisfied with what I have regained.

Thanks again to all for your help!

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mike hi thanks for the reply the bravox drivers have a tighter compostite and lighter spider and larger magnet then the original drivers so they are more forward and not as laidback as the original drivers as i said i loved the ar93 just that back in the 80s the leachmeres stores had a contract with ar to sell them at a price range under 300 i think if ar wanted they could of used the same driver composite as the 9s just the price would have been higher. also the american dollar is stronger then the brazilian real so the can build a better driver for a cheaper price. i also talked to other audiophiles in boston on the speaker mods in the past and they did the same thing i did with other drivers drivers i am listing to some ry cooder now and the vocals are outstanding from other side of the room thanks tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest nathanso

Michael,

I first stumbled onto AR's when my freshman year college roommate (c. 1982) showed up with a pair of AR91's (or perhaps they were AR92's) for our dorm room. I didn't know much about hi-fi speakers but I knew they sounded fantastic; the best I'd ever heard, and my dad had Scott tube gear with pretty decent KLH speakers.

Those AR speakers came with a story: An AR rep had come to my roomie's high school taking orders. He told my roommate to 'never sell these speakers', that they were quite special, and that he would replace damaged parts on warranty forever. We tested that claim when the under-powered receiver we were using blew out one of those cool silver mid-range drivers. Sure enough, a free replacement materialized (with some grumbling from the rep) and we were more careful jamming Bob Marley going forwards. I haven't seen my old roomie or his speakers for 20+ years, but neither have I forgotten that great AR sound.

A couple of weeks ago a pristine set of (much larger) AR90's came up for sale on my local Craigslist. I grabbed them up. The foam surrounds looked fine but didn't even survive the drive home! All six low drivers are now at www.nealspeakerrepair.com for restoration ($25 for 8", $35 for 10", no affil). Neal just restored two sets of woofers for my Dahlquist DQ-20's and DQM-3's which are now working wonderfully.

By next week I should have that long-awaited AR sound in my own living room. A crossover re-cap is planned too, though I may sneak in some listening for a while before that more involved endeavor.

Enjoy your 'new' speakers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MPPurcell

Hi, Nathan,

You're in Martinez, hey? This is the first time I found someone on this forum anywhere near my neck of the woods (Grass Valley, CA).

>I first stumbled onto AR's when my freshman year college

>roommate (c. 1982) showed up with a pair of AR91's (or perhaps

>they were AR92's) for our dorm room.

I don't know how exactly those differ from my 93s--did they have side-firing woofers?

>A couple of weeks ago a pristine set of (much larger) AR90's

>came up for sale on my local Craigslist. I grabbed them up.

Mmmmm, now I believe you are talking about some really fine speakers. Would love to hear how your renovation works out, and maybe hear them some time! Please let us know back here how it's going.

>The foam surrounds looked fine but didn't even survive the

>drive home! All six low drivers are now at

>www.nealspeakerrepair.com for restoration ($25 for 8",

>$35 for 10", no affil).

Right in Sacramento, huh? That's really close to me, a usual trip, and I might have used Neal if I had known. But I am not at all sorry that I shipped them to Millersound. His price was actually better (maybe a little more after the shipping to the East Coast), but the interaction with Bill was priceless. Funny how when those foams are ready to go, they just fall apart with a little vibration.

>By next week I should have that long-awaited AR sound in my

>own living room. A crossover re-cap is planned too, though I

>may sneak in some listening for a while before that more

>involved endeavor.

Good idea. Would like to hear how it all comes out. I haven't done my caps yet either--still listening and getting used to the complete change from what I had before, after refoaming. Still in line for the cap redo.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest nathanso

Michael,

Here's a spotter's guide to the AR Verticals: http://www.arsenal.net/speakers/ar/ar-9/ar-1.gif

I chose Neal's over others due to their close proximity as I've had poor results with UPS (and others) on longer distance shipments. I also got my speakers back 5-days after sending them out! I'm sure both Neals and Millersound do a fine job.

I'll keep the board here apprised of my restoration efforts. Board member Bret is my (unofficial) guide on this project and is very knowledgable on said restorations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>I'll keep the board here apprised of my restoration efforts.

Board member Bret is my (unofficial) guide on this project and

is very knowledgable on said restorations.<

Make that Roy! I can't handle the pressure! :-) He's better at than I am, and has ten times the experience. All I am is persistent. Almost everything I know was taught to me by other people here. (and sometimes the education in plain sight has been embarrassing)

Bret

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...