Modern replacements for AR 3A Tweeter / Midranges

[dynaco_dan]

>>

>>Hi Stan, thank you;

>>

>>Nice photos.

>>

>>I see that it is a 6 ohm impedance tweeter.

>>

>>In theory it will be maybe 2 db lower in volume that a 4

>ohm

>>tweeter.

>>

>>Maybe with the adapters and a parallel resistor this may

>be a

>>valuable replacement option.

>>

>

>I'm a little concerned that I'm running the tweeter

>incorrctly. What resistor value would bring this up to specs?

>

>How would I wire it in?

>

>BTW. How can I measure the rsistance of a tweeter?

>

>

>Thanks for any help.

>

Hi Stan;

I am scratching my grey hair as I write this one, Stan.

The original AR-3A 3/4" tweeter has a 4 ohm rating but has a DCR of 2.75 +/- ohms.

I am terrible at math, your 6 ohm rated tweeter is probably 3.5 - 4.0 +/- ohms DCR.

Parallel, mount on the rear of the magnet, a 5 watt wirewound resistor, by trial and error, of between 1 and 2 ohms.

A rheostat would be great to arrive at a precise resistance value, and then use that value in a fixed 5 watt resistor.

This does not take into consideration the sensitivity of your tweeter.

Other members have much more technical skills to answer more correctly, I am sure.

[Pete B]

I'll add a few points here since there is mention of the origin of the dome tweeter in this thread. I have experience with the patent system and from my perspective it doesn't matter who patented an idea if there is prior art. It is well known that companies try to "slip patents" through the system on the thinking that the investigating patent agent will miss prior art. Many would probably be surprised at the percentage of patents that would not hold up in court when actually put to the test.

Credit for the development of direct radiating loudspeakers (speakers without horn loading) is generally given to Rice and Kellogg of General Electric Co. Research Labs, around 1925, as was documented in their paper: "Notes on the Development of a New Type of Hornless Loudspeaker" The point here is that they tried several drivers with flat diaphragms that otherwise are very similar to modern dome drivers. Finally, in their Figure 7 is a dome driver of "aluminum spinning" with a "thin rubber edge" suspension. I estimate the dome at about 1", and across the full suspension is shown as 2". They also speak of the "inertia diaphragm loudspeaker" which is what we call today the mass controlled region of flat response.

This paper is required reading for anyone working or an expert in the area of loudspeaker design, it was the birth of today's modern speaker and many new ideas are documented.

There is mention of the authors here:

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:UeB5TA...s&ct=clnk&cd=14

Pete B.

[kkantor]

Tom,

One of our senior engineers in Denmark, Knud Thorborg, just celebrated his 50th Anniversary with Peerless last month. He's a remarkable guy, and still works three days a week! If you are interested, I can connect you guys by email or telephone. Just drop me a note. I imagine that he has all kinds of interesting stories to share.

[Guest Bret]

Thanks Steve.

It is all vaguely, but uncomfortably, reminiscent of the first 30 seconds of the movie “Brazil,” isn't it?

Bret

[tysontom]

>Tom,

>

>One of our senior engineers in Denmark, Knud Thorborg, just

>celebrated his 50th Anniversary with Peerless last month.

>He's a remarkable guy, and still works three days a week! If

>you are interested, I can connect you guys by email or

>telephone. Just drop me a note. I imagine that he has all

>kinds of interesting stories to share.

>

>

Ken,

Thanks very much! I will contact you offline.

--Tom Tyson

[Guest Lorin Hollander]

Hello .

I own a pair of Cello Double Amati Speakers used within a Cello system – Performance-II Amps, Palette Preamplifier etc. These are the early Amati version which used the stock AR3-a and LST drivers manufactured (and later imported) by AR in the mid to late 1980s early 90s. Recently I blew all 16 tweeters when overdriving an Allsop sweep test CD! Talk about learning the hard way. The Double Amatis' overall performance had been seriously deteriorating over the past few years - most rapidly in the past months - long before overdriving them while testing. They exhibited an ever increasing high frequency emphasis (and even distortion) - shrillness, shattering, hissing on high voice and strings both on CD and analog. Everything became unbalanced with excessive high frequency nastiness and glare. (This could be do in part to the sun baking on the tweeters overly much.) I have tested and worked on the other equipment in the system and they do not appear to be the problem. (I am a ham radio operator and know my way reasonably well around circuits.) It is unlikely that all 4 crossovers (modified from the LST with good components by Cello, as you all know) went bad over the past months.

Has anyone had experience with these drivers deteriorating and becoming so strident they become unbearable? All 16 tweeter part # are AR 2000084-0 printed on a sticker which reads “Made in USA”. Two of the midrange were changed out between 1990 – 1996 by Cello, one which was distorting and another physically damaged in a move.

The 14 original Midrange drivers are - AR # 200010-1 (again “Made in USA) and the two later models read AR # 1210010 - 3A (331TNH). The latter two do not read “Made in USA, have their part number printed on the side of the magnet and are probably already imported. These interestingly enough have the inch wide black “surround” disk circling the dome made of a thicker plastic material.

I have read with great interest the wealth of information you have bequeathed to us in these posts, and am very grateful. I have discovered myself in a noble company of AR enthusiasts who face a huge challenge when attempting to replace these drivers. I really understand the problem - fine used drivers are rarely available, and new substitutes such as from AB-Tech can be an unknown quantity at best. AB-Tech is currently backordered awaiting shipment from Culver Tonegen, drivers manufactured in Taiwan. What are promised to be NOS are available from Regnar, but I imagine all of us would not be searching for replacement possibilities if the Regnars were acceptable.

I am in contact with one of the original designers of the Cello speakers and he took apart one of my blown tweeters and found that “…there is some foam used underneath the dome that has dry rot.” He advised totally rebuilding the speakers with other drivers. Cello or course “upgraded” to Dynaudio drivers, models now unavailable, and rebuilt the crossovers and baffles. Mark Levinson also advised finding another brand of driver.

So here I am where we all seem to be. Is there a consensus on the bottom line - what AR 3a/LST replacement drivers are the best to use as replacement tweeters? I have read in these posts the understandably differing opinions, and I ask what you believe the best alternative to be.

I have been encouraged to change the midrange drivers as well, but I know how difficult they would be to replace.

I have been a professional classical musician for 50 years and lave lived with the sound of live music all my life. I hope to return these speakers to the way they once sounded. I am grateful for any advice.

Peace.

Lorin

Should I also post this elsewhere?

[Guest aroostookme]

Thanks for the advice, I guess.

I appreciate your belief in the product. I just don't share it blindly. I was hoping someone could think outside the box here.

If my kidneys were somehow like these tweeters there would already be an AR3A dialysis machine on the market working day and night to regain the highs (without much luck I'd bet) .

So -- if anyone out there can get away from the standard "Mopar replacement parts only" line of thought. It'd be great to learn what modern day tweeter can slip into these old boxes and make them sing again. And I promise not to tell anyone you used your knowledge against the academy in this way.

I am willing to mod the holes/box to fit. I am looking for a standard high level option of a standard tweeter -- not a ribbon or anything odd.

Scan Speak, Hiquphon, Morel, Seas?

Anyone have ideas?

[tysontom]

>Thanks for the advice, I guess.

>

>I appreciate your belief in the product. I just don't share it

>blindly. I was hoping someone could think outside the box

>here.

>

>If my kidneys were somehow like these tweeters there would

>already be an AR3A dialysis machine on the market working day

>and night to regain the highs (without much luck I'd bet) .

>

>So -- if anyone out there can get away from the standard

>"Mopar replacement parts only" line of thought. It'd

>be great to learn what modern day tweeter can slip into these

>old boxes and make them sing again. And I promise not to tell

>anyone you used your knowledge against the academy in this

>way.

>

>I am willing to mod the holes/box to fit. I am looking for a

>standard high level option of a standard tweeter -- not a

>ribbon or anything odd.

>

>Scan Speak, Hiquphon, Morel, Seas?

>

>Anyone have ideas?

>

>

Aroostookme, here's the problem with your "think-outside-the-box" theory: the AR 3/4-inch hard-dome tweeter is really quite unique in its construction and in its performance. No one in the world currently makes a hard-dome, flush-mounted 3/4-inch tweeter that is four ohms, and has the same approximate performance and sensitivity, as that tweeter. There are literally dozens of different tweeters that might be shoved into the AR-3a tweeter hole, but the sound would be very different from the memory of those who knew the sound from the original little 3/4-inch AR tweeter. Replacement tweeters would surely work; they would "tweet," be much brighter and louder, but the sound's personality would be very different -- perhaps better or worse. This is why everyone is struggling with this issue now.

Since you are not particularly enamored with the AR sound anyway (and no one is blaming you for that), you might solve your problem -- at least initially -- by abandoning the AR-3as altogether and trying something entirely different.

--Tom Tyson

[soundminded]

People like me just can't leave well enough alone. Join the crowd. And face the daunting fact that except for moral support and direct answers to your technical questions sometimes, to a great degree you are on your own. Nobody but you knows what you are looking for and only you will know if and when you find it. It's expensive, its frustrating, it's time consuming, and it's fun. If it were my goal, I'd probably start by ordering a slew of different 8 ohm dome tweeters from various manufacturers, Morrel, Vifa, Scan Speak, Dayton, etc and some 8 ohm resistors to put in parallel with them. I'd proably also switch at some point to an L-pad instead of the potentiometer volume control And then just start experimenting to see if there's anything there you like. If and when you ever get to the point you want to be, you'll find you have a whole pile of tweeters left over. What to do with them? You could sell them at a considerble loss or you could start building other speaker systems around them. There, now you're on the road to ruin. I hope you have an understanding wife...and a worshop in your garage or basement. Good luck.

[ar_pro]

Well, *I* still support your original idea of dumping those AR mids & tweeters - for certain, anything from Vifa, Scan Speak, Seas, Focal, or Morel will be an improvement, so let's get on the hump, and make this thing happen!

And as long as you're looking for something "outside of the box", how about getting rid of that funny-looking enclosure and old-fashioned woofer, too?

I strongly encourage this endeavor, and again offer to accept any and all of those antiquated AR drivers, crossovers, boxes, etc., that stand between you and your goal - Excelsior!

[kkantor]

Kidney's are a good analogy! Let me stretch it...

A guy walks in to a surgeon's office. "Hey, my hands used to work pretty well. Now they are getting rather arthritic. I know I, at least, need to get them repaired, but, I was hoping you could replace them with something a bit better. You know, the kind of hands your other patients seem to like. After all, I hear that lifespans are up, so new hands could be a real improvement."

Fair enough. My company makes tweeters, and is not averse to selling you a couple. In that regard, I'm like the surgeon. Business is business. Still, until I can understand what you are trying to improve upon, there are too many choices to make a responsible suggestion.

"By the way, doc, I know we just met, but I need a new girlfriend. Any hot leads? I am willing to change my religion and political affiliation."

Apologies in advance...

[roundhome]

let me try this.

I don't like fords never owened one but MY FREINDS have them and yes they are still my freinds. what is it about the ford I don't like?

well lets put a chevy engine in it. no that won't do how about changing the wheels not yet maybe a different set of pipes. but I have spent enough time and money trying to change this into a chevy why not just buy the chevy. buy the way I went to the ford shop to try 'and tell them all the things that was wrong with there car. i don't understand why the were so mad at me.they just needed to make it into a chevy

Jim

ps I play with making a lot of different speakers but also restore many brands back to original. and respect the diferent sounds they have.

This is a fun hobby and i'm not into pisssing anyone off people come to me and ask me to put a chevy engine into a VW bug they hand me the money and i do it they are happy zoom zoom off they go. I had a hard time with putting a big block chevy into a new targa it did not make a better car.

[soundminded]

OK, here's a tikering strategy which won't turn your workshop into a loudspeaker chop shop and which will afford you infinite flexibility to change the basic sound character of your system radically and endlessly to your heart's content. Instead of substituting other drivers, add one or more small full range loudspeaker systems on top of your AR3as using a second amplifier and equalizer connectd to your preamp output. By adjusting the relative sound levels of the new speakers, their equalization, their phase, even their directional radiating patterns by how you aim them, you can experiment endlessly and with complete flexibility to achieve a very wide range of different results. You will be surprised at how easy it is to make radical changes and of course you will have done no damage to your investment. You can also quickly and easily return the sound to the original AR3as to compare the results.

[Guest aroostookme]

So, sorry to have raised the national audiophile blood pressure over my AR3A question.

I did get new kidneys and a new girlfriend out of it (smile).

I appreciate the input from all. Here's what I can tell you about adding in and opting out of several tweeters over the last month. So you know, I have kept the AR mids, and only am switching out the tweeters. I have kept those too so I can leae the world a complete set of AR3A's out of respect to this discussion board's perspectives.

So -- to my ears the AR3a tweeters have some sort of high end deficiency. Maybe they roll off up there, maybe my set is not performing at top notch. But they are not sounding right to my ear using an amp and preamp that does not allow for a treble adjustment. I own a number of great speakers, these are not performing well in the highs (maybe even in the mids).

So, I have swapped out the tweeters for a week each with the following tweeters with varying results. One is a winner for me, the others sounded as good or better, but not as good as the winner.

(1) Hiquphon OW1: Not a good match.

(2) Scan Speak 2010: Much nicer

(3) Morel MDT33: Easily the winner

I am going to keep the Morel in for more listening.

What's different? A little brighter, good tonal balance but much more definition in the mids and highs. I can hear the things I miss that are there in my Proacs, Snells, Quads, and Kefs.

I bet this change makes people here cringe. But I would submit that the old tweeter has less special "tweet" to it than 3A lover's would like to believe it has. I also imagine a correctly designed Zobel might further enhance the match. To me this analogy goes along the lines of the Pele' sports analogy where he learned soccer with a tennis ball making the actual ball easy to work with. This tweeters are much more refined than the earlier tweeters. Isn't it possible they can handle this job with ease?

That's about the limit of my technical insight (smile). But I have world class upper frequencies coming out of my 3A's now.

Certainly someone could analyze that old tweeter, get past the "hard-dome uniqueness" of it all and simply ask what else can do this. That may not solve the issue that people like me are willing to alter the legendary box, but it might bring this set of speakers into the realm of modern hifi.

Okay--- so I don't cause an uproar. I get the old truck keeps the old equipment thing. Original parts and the original sound -- memories, a place in history, the legend.

[stan461]

>So, sorry to have raised the national audiophile blood

>pressure over my AR3A question.

>

No pressure rise from me. In fact, I thank you for doing the legwork and sharing your knowledge .

I called Parts Express maybe 2 or 3 years ago and their tech person recommended the Morel MDT33. I myself have a replacement tweeter and it sounds better than the original.

Its been said before, but the tweeters are now 35 years old! Maybe a rebuild would be the best solution. Who knows?

A few here have suggested to go and play with other speakers. Thats fine but I happen to like that particular sound that is characteristic of an acoustic suspension speaker. So in the end there ain't that many choices.

If you save the original parts you can always restore them to original specs.

For me its a hobby and I'm having fun. And I think thats what counts.

P.S. That Morel is calling me.

[tysontom]

>So, sorry to have raised the national audiophile blood

>pressure over my AR3A question.

Aroostookme, don’t fret: no one’s blood pressure moved more than a point or two regarding your AR-3a retrofit. What you do with your AR-3as is your business, but you should realize that any improvement you made applies to “your ears only,” and doesn’t necessarily mean anybody else. Is it an improvement? It will be brighter and more forward-sounding, but you might want to consider that your high-frequency hearing might be declining somewhat, a normal consequence with advancing age. Many folks get very nervous when this happens, and they quickly blame the equipment. It becomes “finger-pointing time” when the treble they once heard disappears. The first reaction is to over-react. Retrofitting “hotter” tweeters -- a momentary “fix” that seems to solve the problem -- won’t last, and you’ll soon become unhappy (although you might not admit it) after a few weeks of listening to that combination. “Listener fatigue” settles in sooner or later like some dreaded disease. Then you will swap out the Morel for another tweeter, then another, and so forth, until you finally shoot yourself. But this is a hobby, and you can just write it off to "experience."

>

>So -- to my ears the AR3a tweeters have some sort of high end

>deficiency. Maybe they roll off up there, maybe my set is not

>performing at top notch. But they are not sounding right to my

>ear using an amp and preamp that does not allow for a treble

>adjustment. I own a number of great speakers, these are not

>performing well in the highs (maybe even in the mids).

The AR-3a tweeter doesn’t have, as you say, “some sort of high-end deficiency.” It is a proven high-performance design. The tweeter’s on-axis response is actually rising slightly as frequency rises, not falling off. However, it is normal that the overall level of the treble response in the AR-3a is a few dB below that of the midrange and woofer, and thus the speaker has a somewhat reticent or “laid-back” characteristic. If you listen back in the reverberant sound field, this effect is actually not nearly as noticeable, as all concert halls have a similar characteristic.

>(3) Morel MDT33: Easily the winner

>

>I am going to keep the Morel in for more listening.

>

>What's different? A little brighter, good tonal balance but

>much more definition in the mids and highs. I can hear the

>things I miss that are there in my Proacs, Snells, Quads, and

>Kefs.

I think that the Morel MDT33 is a good, high-power-handling tweeter designed for a good 2-way speaker. I looked it up, and I found that it is an 8-ohm tweeter (the AR-3a is a 4-ohm speaker), 1-1/8-inch soft-dome with a semi-horn mounting flange. It is durable and designed for wide-range operation in 2-way systems that need the response to go down to under 2 kHz; however, the AR-3a is a 3-way design with a 5 kHz crossover, so much of the Morel’s advantage is wasted with the AR-3a’s 3-way design. The sensitivity of the tweeter and the AR-3a system don’t match, but this impedance-mismatch actually somewhat reduces the “hotness” of this tweeter.

I also looked at the performance of the MDT 33, and here’s what I see wrong with tweeter for use in the AR-3a: 1.) the MDT 33’s on-axis frequency response is quite smooth through the range to about 15 kHz, where there is a peak in the treble response of 2 or 3 dB before it begins to fall-off rapidly out to -5 dB at 20 kHz. 2.) Off-axis, the response is much worse and not even remotely close to the AR-3a’s original ¾-inch dome tweeter. The Morel MDT 33 is down nearly 20 dB at 20 kHz at 30º off-axis. This is not great dispersion, and the AR-3a tweeter is far superior. This tweeter was designed to be a good midrange and tweeter driver for good 2-way speakers. It is not optimized like the AR ¾-inch tweeter for 3-way operation.

>I bet this change makes people here cringe. But I would submit

>that the old tweeter has less special "tweet" to it

>than 3A lover's would like to believe it has.

No, what makes people “cringe” is to know that you have paid at least $127 each for these tweeters, and they are really not a particularly good choice for the AR-3a. Good luck!

--Tom Tyson

[Carlspeak]

I was pleased to watch from the 'sidelines' the discussion posts regarding the AR3a tweeter replacement as well as a few other subject posts along the same lines.

I was growing tired of all the posts about AR woofers. If AR owners were to disconnect those tweeters and mids (were applicable) and just listen to the bass they would quickly become bored with what they hear because the bass, while obviously adding a dimension to the music, only adds a small dimension relative to what the mids and tweeters add to the overall music listening experience.

IMO, much more post ink should be given to mids and tweeter discussion across all the speakers listed on the classic speaker pages.

AB Tech offers replacement tweeters and mids for a broad range of AR speakers. What do the AR experts have to say about the quality of their offerings? Exactly what are they? Who makes them? What are their specs? AB doesn't say much other than this woofer, tweeter, etc. is a good fit for these AR speakers.... What proof to they have?

[frankmarsi]

RE: Okay, I get it, now it's my turn!

Can anyone say if it was better in the above-mentioned situation to have bought the AB-Tech replacements tweeters, or the Morels, or to go the stretch and buy Dynaudios? For that matter is it a crime to use tone controls to attenuate high frequencies even further, as may be needed?

In my opinion, I think it’s O.K. to use tone-controls, especially with ARs.

This is assuming that your control center has a gentle increase shelf and only with-in the upper range. One case in point is if one listens to many sorts of program material as I do. I typically will go from C/D to vinyl to 10inch tape or cassette, and back and forth depending on my mood and on what medium I have it contained on of course. It so happens that my pre-amp has a very gentle effect with its treble controls, henceforth any increase always sounds smooth and natural.

It goes with out saying that a room's acoustics and furnishings have a major affect also. Speaking for myself, regardless of how the aforementioned costly tweeter may measure up in specs, I'd like to hear the ‘rebuild’ just the same so that I might be prepared for any future need to change myself. Personally I'm very happy with my AB-Tech units, but I have to say I would've been more pleased to have all AR tweeters from the early 1990's period. I could always install a small pot or something in the future if I needed to, or, excuse me, the un-mentionable equalizer to assist me in tuning everything to my tastes. I still, uh-oh, pardon me use tape for my musical pleasure seeking and I've in the past found that I very much needed an equalizer in attempting to record to tape for my tastes.

Speaking of the past, back in the late 1960’s and early 70's I never did conform to many others statements about seeking a pre-amp and amp as being a "straight wire with gain" for maximum listening 'perfection'.

Even with my first AR-3a' and my “Dynaco” PAS-3x (kit built, thank you for the applause) I felt real sound contained more high frequency information than my system was giving, screw other's words, music sounds better to me with more high end info and bass too, of course it should be all nicely balanced and not getting ridiculous. I never in real life thought a cymbal or any other instrument sounded 'muffled' as the 'New England Sound' groups seemed to believe. Although I never wanted such a sizzling high-end, or booming bass that would typically be false sounding and fatiguing after 2 minutes of hearing it. Question might be more intriguing to know what did Mark Levinson think in his remake of the LST to sound better with the drivers he choose to use? I realize AR probably didn’t offer anymore at that time, but what was he feeling besides? Did he in his wisdom feel a ‘need’ as it were to have more sonic information transferred to the listener? He seemed to do pretty well with the “Amatis” and “Grands”, gee I’d love to hear the “Grands” myself some day. Be that as it may, I’m not to far re-moved with my doubled stacked LST’s which contain the same amount of drivers as the Grands. I must imagine that yes of course; they must sound better with their re-designed X-overs and newer drivers, cabinets, etc. I guess there-in lies the rub about this whole AR controversy utilizing vintage equipment. As a group we’re all stuck with the possibility of loosing our beloved high-end tweeters and looking for a viable replacement for them. It’s like, when will those adhesives dry out, or someone pushes in those old domes, or we just blow them out.

I’d like to hear anyone’s opinion of the AB-Tech’s unit, cause I never actually read anything here or else where about them? I remain happily content with AR’s quality of sound just the same. I’m glad to own what I do, I'm staying a “AR-Cultist”!

All replies are welcome.

frankmarsi@verizon.net

P.S. to Carlspeak, I would've posted sooner(re: the sound of AB-Tech's), but I had to turn up the volume.

[frankmarsi]

P.S. I understand that the original Mark Levinson's did contain "AR" drivers made by AR, but I'm meaning the units used after he stopped using AR products.

FM

[Guest Americain]

Hi,

Go to this thread

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/dcbo...ing_type=search

and peruse my experience replacing the tweeters on my AR 3a's. I think you'll find it interesting. I had some great help from Roy C as well as others on this board which made coming here well worth it!

[Guest kfarrand]

FM: "As a group we’re all stuck with the possibility of loosing our beloved high-end tweeters and looking for a viable replacement for them. It’s like, when will those adhesives dry out, or someone pushes in those old domes, or we just blow them out."

I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread - the whole time enjoying Dave Matthews on my primary pair of un-mod'ed AR-3as thru a Dyna Stero 416 connected to the 12" Powerbook I'm typing on playing .MP3's.

Who says you can't 'go home again' when the AR's are hooked up to a Revox A-77 or cassettes on the Nakamichi 700 Tri Tracer or vinyl on "The AR turntable".

Specifically, going back 40 years to the college years in Seattle with the SCA-35 I wired, AR-4xs, Stereo 120+ PAT-4 and the AR-3s . . .

I now know why those guys who collect antique cars have so many sitting in the back yard - spare parts - I'd have three Avantis and a couple of Karmann Ghias if I could afford more than one vintage collection pecadillo. As it is, I'm thrilled with having a second pair of 3as for parts even though I suffer from 'AN' by not having a third set. I'm REALLY envious of you guys with the LSTs :-) (BTW, where are the gals?)

"At a minimum, adopting reactionary nostalgia buys a person some time to develop coping mechanisms to reduce anxiety." (Ken Kantor) Thanks to these retro audio antiques, my anxiety level tonight is waaaay down . . . lets see I'm going to iTune up some Kingston Trio then some Ian and Sylvia, then some Pete Seeger and We Five and HP Lovecraft . . .

Kevin Manson, Island Time, Mon'

St Simons Island, Georgia

[dynaco_dan]

Hi Kevin;

You can be envious but you already have a great, well, 2 great pairs of AR-3A's.

I have always maintained that the LST's were worth twice as much as a pair of 3A's in sound output quality, and they were twice the price of AR-3A's at that time.

This was my initial feeling, in my home, for an entire weekend, in the early - mid 70's.

Here in Vancouver they were $1600.00 CDN a pair, if I remember correctly.

I was a journeyman, but had a low WAF, and I must say, she did allow me to have numerous earlier toys, so I am not complaining.

I was really pouting when I returned them to the store.

I fluked out about 10 - 12 years ago with a surprise phone call out of the blue, an offer of my big bros original LST's, which he had sold to my son's friend.

With no WAF then, I said bring them over, or in, "The Price Is Right", "Come On Down".

They were a piece of something and needed a lot of tender loving care to try to resurrect them to near new, maybe 95% near new.

A pair can often be found on ebay running at about $1,000.00 - $2,000.00 or more for a pair, depending on many factors.

Not everyone will own AR-LST's, there was not a lot of them made and they seem to be going to Asia.

I hope that if you dream of owning a pair of LST's that they come to you.