What to use for surround channels with classic ARs...

[genek]

After putting it off for many years we are finally getting a big TV and some sort of surround sound in the living room, since our TV and amp were both fubar'd in our move last year.

Selecting the amp/receiver has been a chore, but I think I have it narrowed down to either Cambridge Audo or Harman Kardon, they're the only mfrs who have been willing to tell me in writing that their equipment will safely deliver full power into 4 ohm loads and provide real RMS power ratings.

The other speakers are another matter. Much as I'd like to use another pair of classic AR's (and I do have them), there just isn't any space for them at the sides and rear of the listening room. So I'm going to be stuck with little bitty ones. Has anyone heard any "surround speakers," from any mfr, with a mid and high balance even remotely like an AR-3a or 2ax (the bass doesn't matter, because I'll set the amp to cut off anything below 100Hz to everything but my "real" speakers, the ARs)? If not, I have this mad idea to build my own using AB Techservices drivers...

[JKent]

How about Cambridge Soundworks? They're of the same "lineage".

[genek]

How about Cambridge Soundworks? They're of the same "lineage".

That's on my list to check out. Unfortunately, no retailers near me so still need input from someone who's heard them.

[JKent]

That's on my list to check out. Unfortunately, no retailers near me so still need input from someone who's heard them.

I use the discontinued solid oak "Ambiance" from CSW as the rears with AR4x in front. Sounds good to me.

Kent

[oldguide]

The best small speakers by all accounts are PSB. I have used them for years and there is nothing like them. For surround speakers you want the kind that disperse the sound, not just regular speakers. PSB makes a pair in their Alpha series (which BTW was also one of the best speakers ever made along with the AR in the Stereophile article). Best place to buy them is Saturday Audio in Chicago. They've got a pair of demo surrounds for $229.

As for Cambridge, I used to buy their stuff, but when Kloss died they were sold to Creative (the company that makes the SoundBlaster audio computer cards) whose main focus is speakers for computers. Cambridge was an interesting place a few years ago, located in Newton. I visited there once and was privileged to get a tour from the master himself. My understanding is that Cambridge does still sell the Newton, which I believe was the last speaker Kloss designed. Cambridge also used to have a deal where they would ship you the speakers, let you audition and them and if you didn't like them you could send them back. I don't know if Creative still honors that.

As for amps, I have driven my speakers for years with NAD products, which also show up on various product of the year lists. In think TAS picked them as product of the year two years ago and they always place amps on the annual editors choice lists. NAD and Outlaw audio probably make the best bang for the buck stuff. Stay away from Japanese stuff. I used Yamaha and Pioneer and I think that's what killed my tweeters. NAD's big pitch--and it is real--is that their outputs are VERY conservative compared with the inflated outputs of most other manufacturers. Saturday Audio currently has the $1100 754 on sale for the unbelievable price of $699. A steal!

Good luck.

[JKent]

Yes--oldguide is right. CSW is now part of Creative (SoundBlaster) and you have to careful if you want speakers to go with your classics. Some (all?) of the Newton line are ported, not AS. They have "dipole" speakers for surrounds available. The old Ambiance was, IMHO a good rear speaker with ARs up front, but they are no longer being made. If you find a pair in a yard sale or on ebay you might want to grab them. Mine are a nice solid oak with dovetail joints and a "New England" sound.

Bear in mind that surround speakers do not have to be as good as the fronts. I used to use Rat Shack Minimus 7s for surrounds and they worked well (have since sold them tho). If you find a used pair in walnut veneer they'd be a good pairing with classic ARs. There is also a capacitor/xover upgrade available.

What about a pair of KLH 14s? There were two versions of the model 14. One was just like the model 15 & 19 (Dimensions- 14"x 8"x 8"). The other version had a larger flatter cabinet for wall mounting (Approx 18x14x3.75). They used 2 of the ubiquitous KLH midrange/fullrange drivers (the kind found in the Model 21 radio and the big Model Twelve floorstanding speakers). For that matter, a pair of KLH M-105s (aka Model 21 extension speakers) might do. They're about 14x8x4.5 deep. Not sure about the power-handling ability of those tho. Or Advent 400s? They are white (usually yellow) plastic with single 5.25" drivers. Sound good but again I'm not sure how much you plan to crank up the surround channels when you watch Die Hard 47

Would AR 7s be too big? They're about 16x9x6. I bought a pair to use as surrounds but they are bigger than the CSWs.

[ToastedAlmond]

"The best small speakers by all accounts are PSB. I have used them for years and there is nothing like them."

WOW.

I have a pair of RA Labs Mini-Reference. The 6" two-way from about 1994. I'm thinking a Roy Allison speaker JUST MIGHT be a fairly good match for classic AR. I could be wrong.

[oldguide]

Now that I have my ARs together and working, there is no way PSB's match the voice. I also have a Cambridge center channel speaker and it does not match either. As for the surrounds, I am trying out some Atlantics I have.

I think whoever said earlier to look for Allison-designs may be close.

[genek]

Now that I have my ARs together and working, there is no way PSB's match the voice. I also have a Cambridge center channel speaker and it does not match either.

How would you describe the difference in voice between the Cambridge and the ARs?

[Guest bocoogto]

I use a pair of AR LSTII's for side surround and a single AR 3a for rear surround. The LSTII's are ideal for side surround due to their three-angle speaker placement resulting in great dispersion anywhere in the room. The main speakers are AR9LSi's. I have a Pioneer Model 1014 Receiver with all channels set to large so there is no attenuation of low frequencies on any of the speakers. A Hafler DH500 drives the rear surround and built-in infinite baffle 15" woofers.

The investment in this speaker set for home theater is very low compared to even the midpriced "package" surround speaker systems and outperforms them by a BIG margin.

I was prepared to power the AR9LSi's with a pair of Hafler DH200's, but the Pioneer receiver does a surprisingly good job with them.

[genek]

I use a pair of AR LSTII's for side surround and a single AR 3a for rear surround.

In our previous homes I used a pair of AR-6's in back in a Hafler passive arrangement with my AR-2ax's as the front speakers, but our new home presents me with the challenge of a four-sided fireplace in the center of the living room. It's a remarkable design feature, but it's causing me no end of headache trying to figure out a surround layout, because there's no room on the sides of the TV seating area to put 5.1 side surround speakers that are more than 3-4 inches deep, and any sound coming from a 6.1 rear surround speaker will be blocked by the fireplace stack. I think I'm being pushed toward having a pair of front-firing surround speakers behind the fireplace on either side of the room in the classic 4-channel quad setup, which I know is not optimum for home theater use, but it would let me move back up from looking at little bitty satellites to real speakers again. One way or the other, when the TV is off and I'm playing real music, I intend to shut down all the surround speakers and use only the traditional stereo setup through the 2ax's.

[oldguide]

Gene,

You ask about Cambridge v AR. First, a confession--the Cambridge I have is their old center channel speaker not the Newton. So it is an obsolete model by Cambridge standards. I guess the word I would use to describe its sound is flatter. I have not seen any curves on it, but like a lot of center speakers it is made mainly to pick up the voice track. I turn it off most of the time other than when watching movies. I found that if I dial it way back in the amp settings it provides just enough for the voice channel. I tried using one of the PSBs as a center channel, but frankly they just are not voiced like the ARs. The Atlantics work pretty well for the surround channels, I think mainly because of their dipole design.

But now that you guys have me hooked I will probably start prowling garage sales for some more ARs.

[oldguide]

Turns out you can use the PSB's but I still am with those you say stick with AR equipment. I took two PSB Centuries, wired them in parallel to get 4 phms and use two of them as the center. It's just temporary till I can find some more ARs. Not sure why the parallel wiring should change the voicing on them but the proof was in the test recording I use to calibrate them. One warning--BE SURE you have the amp power to do this and know your wiring or you risk losing both your amp and your speakers.

[genek]

Turns out you can use the PSB's but I still am with those you say stick with AR equipment. I took two PSB Centuries, wired them in parallel to get 4 phms and use two of them as the center. It's just temporary till I can find some more ARs. Not sure why the parallel wiring should change the voicing on them but the proof was in the test recording I use to calibrate them. One warning--BE SURE you have the amp power to do this and know your wiring or you risk losing both your amp and your speakers.

I've had to completely rethink the plumbing on this after shopping a number of AV receivers and coming to the conclusion that pretty much all of them are basically pumped up table radios with multiple channels. No phono inputs, no tape monitor loops, none of the essentials for a functional music system. My current thinking is leaning toward plugging all the digital sources into an outboard surround processor with the front LR channels going into the Aux input of a real stereo amp and then looking for add-on amplification and speakers for the surround and center channel. The quest for speakers for these will have to go on hold until I determine what the electronics are going to be and how much power they'll have. I may even see if I can make something myself out of all the assorted AR mids and tweeters in my spare parts collection.

[Guest bocoogto]

The audio quality of many TV programs broadcast in Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround sound is fantastic!! Network programs such as ER, some PBS stations' music broadcasts, and recent movies broadcast in DD 5.1 have very realistic, full range audio that surpasses anything we had a program sources in the '60's, '70's, and '80's. To experience the effect of five full range audio channels, you need to use a modern AV receiver. The are far removed from pumped-up table radios!!

If your problem with the ones you looked at is lack of phono preamp and tape monitor loops, why don't you use a vintage audio preamp for the two-channel sources that you may want to utilize these features? You can plug the low-level output of this vintage audio preamp into your modern AV receiver. You may not have noticed that all but the very low end AV receivers have outputs for external power amps. These outputs allow you to use any power amps you want, but retain the surround sound features available in the AV receiver. If you buy any modern receiver from Pioneer, Sony, or others priced one or two steps above entry level, you will be amazed at the flexibility, sound quality, user friendliness, and features they provide. You may find, as I have, that the built-in power amps are surprisingly stout. As a Hafler engineer told me recently, "we can make a lot more power--higher quality audio---with a much smaller box." He was comparing my vintage DH500 amplifier with their currently available amps.

You may dismiss what I've said and stick with two channel stereo or derived surround sound from two channels, but for a comparitively small investment, you can have five very high quality channels coming out of our beloved AR speakers. And, if you want to spend more money, you have the option of adding a subwoofer that blows the socks off our old AR's.

[genek]

The audio quality of many TV programs broadcast in Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround sound is fantastic!! Network programs such as ER, some PBS stations' music broadcasts, and recent movies broadcast in DD 5.1 have very realistic, full range audio that surpasses anything we had a program sources in the '60's, '70's, and '80's. To experience the effect of five full range audio channels, you need to use a modern AV receiver. The are far removed from pumped-up table radios!!

If your problem with the ones you looked at is lack of phono preamp and tape monitor loops, why don't you use a vintage audio preamp for the two-channel sources that you may want to utilize these features? You can plug the low-level output of this vintage audio preamp into your modern AV receiver. You may not have noticed that all but the very low end AV receivers have outputs for external power amps. These outputs allow you to use any power amps you want, but retain the surround sound features available in the AV receiver. If you buy any modern receiver from Pioneer, Sony, or others priced one or two steps above entry level, you will be amazed at the flexibility, sound quality, user friendliness, and features they provide. You may find, as I have, that the built-in power amps are surprisingly stout. As a Hafler engineer told me recently, "we can make a lot more power--higher quality audio---with a much smaller box." He was comparing my vintage DH500 amplifier with their currently available amps.

You may dismiss what I've said and stick with two channel stereo or derived surround sound from two channels, but for a comparitively small investment, you can have five very high quality channels coming out of our beloved AR speakers. And, if you want to spend more money, you have the option of adding a subwoofer that blows the socks off our old AR's.

I have every intention of adding the necessary channels for at least some sort of surround sound. And I know that there's good sound to be gotten out of the source material on DVDs. The problem I'm running into is twofold: one, as previously noted, the inability of modern receivers and even high-end separates to accomodate the various analog sources of a serious vintage system; and two, the questionable compatibility of many modern amplifiers with vintage AR speakers whose impedance may drop to as low as 2 ohms under certain conditions. I've managed to obtain written verifications from a total of *three* manufacturers that their equipment can be safely used with a pair of AR-3s (Cambridge Audio, Onkyo and NAD); everyone else either doesn't respond to my inquiries or flat-out says it won't work. And just to be really curmudgeonly, I HATE the modern habit of taking varous controls such as balance, bass, treble, etc., off the front panel and putting them into fiddly electronic OSDs.

So, no, I'm not planning on staying with two stereo channels or trying to fake surround through same. But once I finally get things figured out, four or more channels of sound are going to be coming out of boxes with silver metal front panels and real knobs whose designers knew what to do with a set of classic AR speakers.

[Guest bocoogto]

Did you read my comment about preamp outputs from modern AV receivers? These receivers do have them and they allow you to use whatever power amp you wish.

Also, once you get into the menu to balance 5.1 channels, you will be astounded how flexible and easy this is to do. You can taylor the preamp outputs to equalize the response of any one or all of the speakers. Or, you can leave every channel with flat frequency response. With Pioneer and others, you can put white noise on every channel and set levels or equalization to each individual speaker manually or let the receiver set the levels and equalization automatically.

There is no way these things could be accomplished with old technology/stereo amplifiers. The good news is, our AR speakers are up the the task, and sound sooo great with audio material they never were given the chance to reproduce!!! The reason most all of the home theater systems you've heard don't sound so good, is they use lousy speakers. You can take care of that problem!!

[genek]

Did you read my comment about preamp outputs from modern AV receivers? These receivers do have them and they allow you to use whatever power amp you wish.

Yes, I did. The problem is that the preamp/control portion of modern AV receivers is the part that I dislike.

[Guest bocoogto]

Not trying to be argumentive, but the two things you mentioned that you don't like about modern AV receivers can be remedied by using any vintage stereo two channel preamp's phone stage and tape monitor. Plug this into one of the AV receiver's inputs and you now have those two features when listening to vinyl or tape. Another possibility is a stand alone phono preamp which can be had anywhere from $35 to several hundred dollars depending on how serious you are about vinyl.

[genek]

Not trying to be argumentive, but the two things you mentioned that you don't like about modern AV receivers can be remedied by using any vintage stereo two channel preamp's phone stage and tape monitor. Plug this into one of the AV receiver's inputs and you now have those two features when listening to vinyl or tape. Another possibility is a stand alone phono preamp which can be had anywhere from $35 to several hundred dollars depending on how serious you are about vinyl.

I'm leaning toward going the reverse direction, feed the front main channel outputs of an outboard surround processor into the aux input of my current stereo system, then add additional amplification for the remaining channels. Then all I have to do when listening to music is turn the processor and other amps off. Your approach would not remedy my dislike for computerized tone and balance controls, nor would it allow me to monitor recordings made off the surround sources.

[genek]

Well, it turns out this is even more complicated a problem than either of us realized, because even if AV receivers had tape monitor loops, they don't send sound from digital audio sources to the analog tape outs anyway.

But I have figured out how to do this. Since cable boxes and dvd players can simultaneously output digital audio and analog stereo, I can connect their digital outputs to the digital inputs of an AV receiver and also connect their analog stereo outputs and an external phono stage to an audio selector switch feeding into the line in of a recording control box (dbx200, etc.), then connect that to the AV receiver's Aux input. By switching the receiver to Aux, I can select between turntable/s, CD player and the analog stereo outputs of the surround sources and feed them through the recording control box's tape monitor and external processor loops as needed, and by switching the receiver to the surround sources play them through the receiver's surround processor. I won't be able to record or tape monitor FM, but my existing setup hasn't been connected to an FM antenna for the past 10 years, so who cares. Now all I need to do is find an AV receiver with the necessary power amp specs to support old speakers and I'm home free.

[oldguide]

Gene,

Your solution makes a lot of sense. I take it you like the tube amps?

However, let me suggest that you at least owe it to yourself to audition an NAD, which is on your OK list. Right now Saturday Audio has a half price deal on an NAD 754. They even have an audition deal where if you don't like it you can send it back. Of the amps on your list NAD as way above both Cambridge and Onkyo. If you have a dealer in your area, let them lend you one for a few days to audition it with your speakers in your home. Unless you go triple the price you will not find anything in the surround category that comes close. NAD's big selling point has always been its conservative power ratings.

I am running an NAD 742, which is one of their cheaper--and now obsolete amps-- with two AR3s, plus the parallel wired PSBs along with the Atlantics. I turned pm the clipping not to protect the ARs but the other speakers. The sound can fill a three story house and make the walls shake. The problem is it also exposes the shoddy production values of too many CDs. Which is why I still lean towards vinyl.

The other option is to skip the receiver part entirely, just running a good tuner and run one of NADs multichannel amps.

There also was much discussion on the TAS board about using high end computer sound cards to take care of the digital, multi-channel processing and them just feeding the signal through your amps. Shuttle sells what they call a media computer for around $500 that you could also feed into your aux, input. The sucker is about the size of a stereo component and kicks out some serious sound. TAS had a series of articles a year or so ago about the high end sound cards and high end audio. A good high end sound card used for the digital part of a preamp will allow you to play with just about any sound component including the equivalent of an equalizer. That way you can feed digital sources (such as all new CDS and DVDs) into the computer and have complete control of their settings (instead of those silly preset "environments" on most digital preamps). Right now the system I am heading for would be somewhat like you describe, only using the computer to monitor the digital stuff and then an amp like MacIntosh to do the processing. Frankly, just like the sound of the ARs, there is nothing like the sound of those tube amps. But for now I run NAD and it does what I need it to do and at unbelievable price.

In reality, most multichannel receivers are merely computers connected to sound reproduction components. So why not get a decent, real computer whose sound card can run rings around most of the current components AND allows you to upgrade the sound card. My sense--and I take it the consensus of TAS was that is the direction we are headed--highly compact computers to take care of the DAC issue feeding into high quality integrated amps or even separate multiamp setups (the Shuttles all allows for up to 7 channels to feed into amps).

Just some thoughts.

[genek]

Your solution makes a lot of sense. I take it you like the tube amps?

However, let me suggest that you at least owe it to yourself to audition an NAD, which is on your OK list.

It's been probably 40 years since I had a tube amp, and never one with terribly much power. I always thought of my AR speakers as being the physical equivalent of a tube stage at the end of the audio chain.

The one big problem I've always had with NADs is that, frankly, I think their battleship grey exteriors are ugly as sin. Not quite as bad as all the unreadable black-cased stuff that turns one corner of my entertainment wall into the black hole of video, but close. If there was some way to get one of the platinum finish units they sell overseas, maybe, but unfortunately no dice. For a while there it seemed that the traditional silver face was making a comeback in audio, but these days it only seems to be happening outside of the US. I spotted a Yamaha unit that looks promising, though, and am waiting for a reply on my inquiry about 4 ohm speakers.

[oldguide]

Go with Cambridge then, they come in silver and have a NAD-like sound. In fact I have heard that NAD has had some quality problems and the in some ways Cambridge is the new NAD. Don't quote me on it, but I recollect that Cambridge involves some old NAD people. On the other hand you could always buy a Theta Dreadnaught for the price of a car.

[genek]

Go with Cambridge then, they come in silver and have a NAD-like sound. In fact I have heard that NAD has had some quality problems and the in some ways Cambridge is the new NAD. Don't quote me on it, but I recollect that Cambridge involves some old NAD people. On the other hand you could always buy a Theta Dreadnaught for the price of a car.

Yes, online browsing has turned up some real horror stories about quality issues with recent NAD gear.

In addition to the Cambridges, I've been looking at the user manuals for Rotel receivers and will probably end up making the 30-mile drive to the nearest dealer to check one out if I decide to spend more...