AR Model 14?

[Guest Mark Robbins]

Hi all, newbie here with a question regarding the AR Model 14 speaker.

I found this ad on Craigslist and am interested in finding as much info as possible on these speakers:

AR 14

I tried looking through the info section of this site, but as far as i can see it is not represented.

Any opinions on this speaker? How would you describe the bass extension?

Cheers,

Mark

Vancouver, BC

[Steve F]

From a post of mine a few years ago--

The AR-14 was introduced in early 1976, as part of the "second wave" of Advanced Development Division introductions. The 10Pi, 11, and MST were the first ADD intros in March 1975. The 16, then the 12 and 14 followed shortly thereafter.

The 14 was designed mostly as AR’s assault on Advent’s market leadership position with their hugely successful Large Advent. AR decided to use the 10" woofer in a slightly larger enclosure—the same volume as the cabinet for the 12" woofer—in order to extend the low-end response a little deeper. The lowered system resonance had to be balanced against the potential for over-excursion of the 10" driver, so ultimate power-handling was a major consideration during the 12’s and 14’s development.

In the end, the low-end response came out to –3db @44Hz, very good performance for a 10" system, but still a ways away from the –3dB @35Hz of the 11 and 10PI, and still not as deep as the Large Advent.

The 14 crossed over to the 1" dome tweeter at 1300Hz, a remarkably low crossover, considering the tweeter’s 1050Hz resonance. Ordinarily, one could expect either high distortion at the bottom of the tweeter’s operating range or limited power handling, but I never recall the 14 suffering from these problems, so apparently the crossover was well designed. The 1300Hz crossover point allowed the speaker’s energy response to be reasonably uniform, since a woofer of that diameter won’t become severely directional until about 2000Hz.

Unfortunately, the 14 never achieved the marketplace success that AR had envisioned. This was probably due to the bitter taste left in dealers’ mouths from AR’s horrendous marketing and sales policies of the 60’s and early ‘70’s—too many "burned bridges" to repair. The ADD line was supposed to be a limited distribution, high dealer profit line, but AR couldn’t convince enough dealers to come on board for them to recapture their marketplace dominance of the late 50’s to mid 60’s.

I do not remember ever seeing a test report of the 14 by any of the "Big Three"—Stereo Review, High Fidelity, or Audio. It was an excellent-sounding speaker, however: smooth, uncolored, open, in other words, all the best AR traits. It was a very worthy successor to the 2x (which had never really caught on), and considerably less money than the 12. I remember in direct A-B with the Large Advent, it was stunningly superior (except for the very bottom), far more natural, and left the Advent sounding strikingly honky and nasal by comparison.

Overall, a relatively unheralded speaker, but a very good one.

Steve F.

[Guest Mark Robbins]

Thanks very much for the reply, Steve: exactly the info' i was looking for.

Mark

[dynaco_dan]

Hi Steve;

An excellent write-up, thank you.

A past customer of mine gave me a pair that he was going to take to the dump.

I haven't tried them out yet.

At the very least, they need re-foamed.

Walnut veneer looks nice at least.

[Diamonds&Rust]

Thanks very much for the reply, Steve: exactly the info' i was looking for.

Steve's good.

I just wanted to make this comment: If you compare a 14 to an 11 or a 10pi or a 3a, or you only worry about the bass extension, you could write this speaker off and that would be a shame. By modern speaker standards, the bass in the 14 is exceptional. At 44Hz, unless you are listening to pipe organ or you have a bass drum fetish, you (one, me, they) might be surprised by just how low 40Hz is.

One of their best attributes is that they are really easy to drive at 8 ohms. You don't need an amplifier that can supply gobs of current into 4 ohms. They are, in my opinion, a great choice if you don't have an extra Phase Linear 400 or Adcom amp sitting around. They sound excellent with as little as a 45w/channel receiver.

When I was restoring a pair I sat and listened and was angry that I left the subwoofer on (this is not a fib or fable) and had to get up to turn it off. It was off.

For a lot of "modern" music, the bass extension is more than enough. There were multiple tweeters used and *I* feel like the ones in the photo you provided were superior to the others. (that's a totally subjective thing: I "feel" that these are less "forward" and may extend into the woofer's top frequencies a little less than the others - does it leave a "hole?" - not that I can tell, but I'd prefer a dip to a bump.)

Like their predecessor, the 2ax, these are a fantastic choice for us hobby guys. The speakers are usually CHEAP when we buy them. The crossover is simple so it is *cheap* to re-cap these and do anything else that you might want to do. The 10" woofer gives you more options for foam. There are fewer drivers to replace should something be wrong with one. And I believe those pictured will be stuffed with poly, so you don't have to deal with fiberglass.

I don't think anyone who restores a pair of these and listens to them will be disappointed - unless they paid too much. They lack the midrange detail of the 10pi / 3a, and no, they can't do the very deepest bass frequencies (almost subsonic stuff - 40Hz is really very low and I think there is some extension below that) ---but they are still a very smooth, very "AR", speaker system and one that is being overlooked, which makes them a bargain.

They are also a reasonable test-bed if you want to try to "create your own" by substituting a pair of $250 tweeters. (So I fantasize - sue me)

The only drawback is the cost of the grills if you can find some like the originals somewhere.

[tysontom]

This is an interesting post made by SteveF regarding the AR-14. I agree with what he says, and I would add a few comments:

It is true that AR did not achieve the success with the AR-14 that the company envisioned; in fact, the speaker sold only a fraction of the numbers of the old AR-2-2a-2ax-series, and not close to the number of models Advent sold with the original Advent speaker. The latter was an very successful speaker that represented tremendous value at a very modest cost, and AR studied the original and newer Advent model extensively as they worked on the design of the AR-14 in the fall of 1975 (the AR-14 was introduced in March, 1976 as the so-called “Mark I” version with the brass logo; the “silver-and-black Mark II” versions came late that year). The AR-14 was gone by 1979, I believe, so it was only made for a short period before being replaced by the AR38-series and related models.

During development of the AR-14, AR’s engineers tested the original Advent (as a benchmark) and found that it had a bass resonance of around 42-43 Hz, about the same as that of the AR-3a, and found the new Advent somewhat higher at 45-46 Hz. These are outstandingly low figures for a low-cost speaker, but tests (internal and confidential at the time) showed that the Advent had significant irregularity in energy response throughout the audible spectrum, with a falling response of 3.5 dB from 200 Hz to 630 Hz, then rising again 2 dB at 800 Hz until 2000 Hz. Another jump of 3.5 dB occurs at 3150 Hz, falling steadily 3.5 dB out to 12,500 Hz, and finally down by 10 dB at 20 kHz. The result was, as they said, “The system thus has a rising bass response with drop in frequency and a broad mid-range hump centered on 3150 Hz….” “Listening tests confirmed the measurements…” Comments were less than flattering for this speaker, and the conclusion was that material costs for the Advent were in line with those of AR speakers, and that the woofer manufacturing costs were higher than the equivalent AR 10-inch speaker, and thus compromises were made in the crossover and tweeter area of the design in order to make a profitable loudspeaker selling at its price point.

Where the AR-14 succeeded was in the balance of its energy response across the spectrum. It was arguably more accurate than the Advent, but it gave up some low-frequency energy along the way. This assessment compares favorable with the comments made by SteveF when he compared the AR-14 to the Advent. Nevertheless, these points were lost somewhere in the translation, as the Advent had accumulated a great deal of momentum in the market place, and also was frequently compared with the upper-end ARs rather than the AR-14. Who knows what might have happened had the AR-14 been introduced in the late 60s; it would have been far more competitive with the Advent.

--Tom Tyson

[Diamonds&Rust]

It was arguably more accurate than the Advent

--Tom Tyson

Tom, were you listening to the Mk I or the Mk II? If both, do you remember hearing a difference? Which did you find superior?

As you've heard me say before, I sold a stink-pot full of these (some brass badged "left-overs") in '78-79 and could have continued if there had been more stock. They sent me all of them from five stores. I love these speakers. We didn't carry Advent, but I would tell people to "please" go listen to the Advent and then come back and get the 14s, so they wouldn't have to wonder if they should have bought the Advent, instead. I held-onto the last pair in the store for a buddy of mine who was upgrading from the small Advent. ( He was driving a pair of AR-14s with a Kenwood KA-9100. That was a nice combination.)

In their price range were the Pioneer HPM-60, the JBL-L40, and some vinyl clad 12" Cerwin-Vegas, Technics had something just awful in this range, and I don't know what Kenwood thought they were up-to trying to build speakers... There was nothing in their price range that compared - at all. At all. I think I remember Yamaha did have a contender at slightly more money.

I think they are perhaps *the* bargain out there, if it just weren't for the cost of the grills. It's hard for me to say they are worth twice as much as pair of 2ax's by the time you buy grills. At least there are no pots to have to clean.

[tysontom]

Tom, were you listening to the Mk I or the Mk II? If both, do you remember hearing a difference? Which did you find superior?

I have never listened to them side-by-side, but I would seriously doubt that there is any noticeable difference between them. There were some differences early-on regarding the 1-inch Peerless tweeter, but this was later taken in-house for better quality control. Otherwise, everything should have been pretty much the same as far as I can tell.

--Tom Tyson