Stereophile Review of AR3a...

[Pete B]

You're forgetting the "really, really fall in love with both the sound and the cosmetics" part. Most of the models you just described never made it to the point where I asked the price. And now the Wilsons have morphed into dayglo props from the new "Star Trek" movie. I guess they don't have trees in Utah.

My guess is you'd also have to put about $50k into some sort of bonded escrow to guarantee my "AR under Villchur" customer exerience. Unless you're planning on putting in a bid to fill my $2500 "maintain it myself" RFQ.

Your compensation figures are a bit backwards as far as a production design goes versus full

custom. Consider what it costs to have custom kitchen cabinets made. Are you aware of what

Lee Taylor charges for custom work: http://www.taylorspeakers.com/html/custom__kits.html

Again, just curious what do you consider good cosmetics? Dark real wood finish, with black grille

cloth?

Do you consider a small tower design better or do you prefer the large bookshelf format?

Have you ever tried your 3a's pull out away from the wall a foot or so?

What about the AR-9's styling and sound wise?

[genek]

I see, how do you like it?

Do you switch to 2ch mode for music listening?

It's good. It's not some 400wpc powerhouse, but we're not even working it hard enough for it to get much warmer than it sits at idle. I especially like the fact that the preamp completely bypasses all digital processing in 2ch mode and becomes a plain, old-fashioned analog preamp, complete with MM/MC phono and real tape monitor/EPL.

[Pete B]

Your compensation figures are a bit backwards as far as a production design goes versus full

custom. Consider what it costs to have custom kitchen cabinets made. Are you aware of what

Lee Taylor charges for custom work: http://www.taylorspeakers.com/html/custom__kits.html

Again, just curious what do you consider good cosmetics? Dark real wood finish, with black grille

cloth?

Do you consider a small tower design better or do you prefer the large bookshelf format?

Have you ever tried your 3a's pull out away from the wall a foot or so?

What about the AR-9's styling and sound wise?

You didn't want to respond to my marketing survey?

Just in case I decide to design a clone.

[genek]

Your compensation figures are a bit backwards as far as a production design goes versus full

custom. Consider what it costs to have custom kitchen cabinets made. Are you aware of what

Lee Taylor charges for custom work: http://www.taylorspeakers.com/html/custom__kits.html

You didn't want to respond to my marketing survey?

Just in case I decide to design a clone.

Somehow I missed this post entirely while replying to the one before it.

I was thinking more along the lines of what someone would have to present to me in a showroom as a production model. If I was inclined to have something custom built, I think would have had had it done by now. The amounts I mentioned were what would make me comfortable making a purchse, not what would be needed to make it worth someone's while.

I definitely prefer wood; it doesn't necessarily have to be dark, although that is mostly what i have now. I like the classic light linen grill cloth, though I could probably get used to something different as long as it wasn't some weird shade of blue or orange.

I currently have my 3a's on a pair of AR's old X-bases, and they are away from the wall about 15" to get their faces even with the fronts of some wall units. The floor space for towers would be there if needed.

I've only heard the 9's once. They were overkill for the room they were in, so I don'r think they got a fair hearing. I liked the look of them well enough.

[Carlspeak]

Got the Oct. issue of Stereophile today. STill no article yet.

[Guest pbda]

Waiting with bated breath here, too...

[soundminded]

Waiting with bated breath here, too...

They have a problem. If they say it blows away modern speakers costing 10 to 100 times as much they'll catch hell from their advertisers. And if they don't....well we know who to write to.

[Carlspeak]

They have a problem. If they say it blows away modern speakers costing 10 to 100 times as much they'll catch hell from their advertisers. And if they don't....well we know who to write to.

The Nov. issue is out and still no article. Yes, I agree they have a problem. I suspect, however, it's with cost and priorities. The Sept. issue had only one record review - unheard of and which JA explained in the Nov. issue was the result of the two issues I've speculated on heretofore.

The write up of the listening and instrument testing results must surely be complete by now.

Peter, any help here? Perhaps a posting of the write up on the Sterephile website where there's much more room and less cost?

[Zilch]

O.K., O.K., since I've already done the measurements, I'll write a review....

[rl1856]

Like the rest of you, I have been waiting for the SP article. It was promised for Sept 09 if I recall correctly. Nov issue arrived and no article so I queried JA who hangs out on the Audio Asylum Critics forum about it- according to him, the size of the article approximately equals 3 regular reviews, thus finding space for it is a challenge. He thinks that it should appear in print in early 2010.

Best,

Ross

[Zilch]

If he spread it out over three issues, they'd sell more magazines to the restorationist fringe that doesn't otherwise give a whit for StereoPhile.

[Who knows; some might even subscribe.... ]

[soundminded]

I'm taking bets on which event will happen first, Stereophile's promised article on AR3a comparing it with its long list of best speakers in the world of the month or the second coming of Jesus. I'm putting my money on Jesus.

[Carlspeak]

I'm taking bets on which event will happen first, Stereophile's promised article on AR3a comparing it with its long list of best speakers in the world of the month or the second coming of Jesus. I'm putting my money on Jesus.

Instead, I put my money on JA (a distant relative perhaps?) and wrote him to complain that the April 2010 issue had come and gone without the article. He responded late last week to say the article is very long and he's struggling with finding room for it. I suggested he consider publishing it exclusively on their website because a large group of vintage speaker enthusiasts were anxiously awaiting its publication. He responded to say he'd discuss it with Peter.

We'll see......

[genek]

Instead, I put my money on JA (a distant relative perhaps?) and wrote him to complain that the April 2010 issue had come and gone without the article. He responded late last week to say the article is very long and he's struggling with finding room for it. I suggested he consider publishing it exclusively on their website because a large group of vintage speaker enthusiasts were anxiously awaiting its publication. He responded to say he'd discuss it with Peter.

We'll see......

Shacky has since reported that he's heard other 3a's that convinced him that the pair he loaned to Stereophile was subpar, so I'm not nearly as interested in this as I previously might have been. I think we've all read more than enough descriptions of the sound of ARs that aren't delivering their original performance right here on CSP.

[Carlspeak]

All of the speakers reviewed and tested by Stereophile are, by definition, OLD. Thus, they will be fraught with old age 'itis' and subject to an enlarged number of variables impacting their performance. Opinions rendered on a single speaker taken on its own merits will most likely not be overly glowing.

However, since they all are old, then the playing field should be somewhat leveled and comparisons between brands might (just might) be of significance.

We all need to take the report with a grain of salt. Any hope of a true comparison of pristine condition speakers is a pipe dream.

[soundminded]

All of the speakers reviewed and tested by Stereophile are, by definition, OLD. Thus, they will be fraught with old age 'itis' and subject to an enlarged number of variables impacting their performance. Opinions rendered on a single speaker taken on its own merits will most likely not be overly glowing.

However, since they all are old, then the playing field should be somewhat leveled and comparisons between brands might (just might) be of significance.

We all need to take the report with a grain of salt. Any hope of a true comparison of pristine condition speakers is a pipe dream.

Well here's a howdy do for ya. In an era when bright sounding speakers are in vogue, one with a deliberately rolled off high end that is now said to be sub par even by comparison to other samples of the same model reviewed by a magazine that I'm now told only reviews "old" speakers (didn't know that.) What kind of review would one expect? At best a statement that says "it was good in its day but doesn't come close to measuring up by today's standards." At worst a sneering attack on both the technology and the reviewers who highly rated them when they were first introduced to the market. What would they say about them being displayed at the Smithsonian Museum, that they were the first of their kind but not of very high quality by today's standards? Will the question whether or not people who highly praised them in the past were somehow deaf and dumb? What about their reputation for accuracy?

There is an enormous amount of documentation available in the literature for this particular speaker. Do you think they bothered to compare their own measured results with that of other testers to see if there are indications that something is wrong with them? We should know if they publish their data.

I've never held this magazine in high regard. Unlike the three hobbyist magazines of the 1960s and 1970s I don't have conficence in the technical savvyness of these people. I expect just a mediocre review of the speakers themselves with a long story about how they were developed and what a pioneering effort it was. All that will be left out are photos of the covered wagons and horses they were delivered in.

[Zilch]

Nobody listens to the Zilchster -- they should run it in multiple installments to milk it for all it's worth in sales....

[rl1856]

Shacky has since reported that he's heard other 3a's that convinced him that the pair he loaned to Stereophile was subpar, so I'm not nearly as interested in this as I previously might have been. I think we've all read more than enough descriptions of the sound of ARs that aren't delivering their original performance right here on CSP.

I thought PB was aware of the subpar performance of the first tested pair and then sought out another pair that measured closer to original specifications. Supposedly all of this is chronicled in the article.....if it ever sees the light of day.

A recent thread in the Critics Section of Audio Asylum concerned the viability of a magazine or regular columns in an existing magazine devoted to vintage audio. Many opinions for and against. Both JA and PB expressed their thoughts and I would suggest interested readers take a look at the thread because they do disagree on the subject. Call me a cynic, but if this is a hint that PB may be leaving the mag, that may put the ultimate publication of the article in jeopardy.

Best,

Ross

[soundminded]

I thought PB was aware of the subpar performance of the first tested pair and then sought out another pair that measured closer to original specifications. Supposedly all of this is chronicled in the article.....if it ever sees the light of day.

A recent thread in the Critics Section of Audio Asylum concerned the viability of a magazine or regular columns in an existing magazine devoted to vintage audio. Many opinions for and against. Both JA and PB expressed their thoughts and I would suggest interested readers take a look at the thread because they do disagree on the subject. Call me a cynic, but if this is a hint that PB may be leaving the mag, that may put the ultimate publication of the article in jeopardy.

Best,

Ross

It's never a good idea to disagree with your boss in public if you want to keep your job, especially when your boss owns the company. Atkinson slapped Breunniger down hard telling him he had to worry about paying his mortgage and for his kids' college education and it was his job alone to decide what kinds of articles would attract sufficent subscribers, sell sell magazines, and what wouldn't. Perhaps he was also worried that advertisers who read that equipment made and sold decades ago and available used for a small fraction of their offerings worked about as well or even better than theirs did.

Breunniger was skating on very thin ice. The two rules of working for someone else are; Rule #1- the boss is always right and Rule #2- when the boss is wrong refer to Rule #1.

Breunniger said he had a large collection of "vintage" equipment and has a fondness for it. It's surprising that among that collection isn't a pair of AR3as which have been fully restored by himself. I think the article will probably never see the light of day. It is likely far too long and comes to the wrong conclusion. What he should have said was that AR3a (he got it wrong in his posting, he referred to AR3) was a pioneering effort that was excellent in its day but the world has moved on with a wide variety of better products. Instead if he said something like...this is still one of the best producers of low distortion bass available and with restoration and a bit of Eq can be made to sound as good as there is, he was a dead duck.

Well it probably went down entirely differently than I guessed but a year later it seems to me that this is a project that Atkinson has no enthusiasm for to say the least. I find it impossible to respect a man who claims to be able to hear differences of one tenth of a decibel and will work tirelessly at a workstation to equalize a 64 band equalizer to the last tenth of a db until he gets it "pefect" when he makes a recording but would not turn a bass or treble control so much as 15 degrees to improve the sound of a recording that is shrill or dull, thin, or boomy when he listens to one. I've never liked his magazine and find it inferior to all three of the popular magazines I used to subscribe to back in the golden age of audio. Besides it is available on line. Why buy the cow when the milk is free? I no longer care what the greatest speaker in the world of the month is or why a pocket sized preamp consisting of three 6AT7 tubes is worth $10,000 when 50 years ago you could have built the same circuit yourself for under $100.

[Carlspeak]

I heard back from JA yesterday and here's the final word on the subject - at least from Stereophile:

With regret, I must inform you that Peter Breuninger is no longer a contributor to Stereophile. His AR3/Advent review will not be appearing in Stereophile. I am sure it will be published elsewhere, however.

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

[soundminded]

I heard back from JA yesterday and here's the final word on the subject - at least from Stereophile:

With regret, I must inform you that Peter Breuninger is no longer a contributor to Stereophile. His AR3/Advent review will not be appearing in Stereophile. I am sure it will be published elsewhere, however.

John Atkinson

Editor, Stereophile

"I heard back from JA yesterday"

A direct pipeline to "Mister Big" himself! Wow! Do you have a direct pipeline to god too or does God go through JA to communicate with you?

[Zilch]

Minus JA's measurements, very likely.

[so much for that venture.... ]

[soundminded]

"Minus JA's measurements, very likely.

[so much for that venture.... "

Or he could just use your data. After all, one set of inaccurate, incomplete, erronious misleading data is just as valueless as any other. Somebody want to show me those AR curves which display every driver as ruler flat over its range and when you put them together they are ruler flat over the entire sound spectrum?

[Zilch]

I expect JA did a better and more comprehensive job of it than me; it would have been instructive to review his findings.

[Perhaps we can talk him into posting them here.... ]

[soundminded]

I expect JA did a better and more comprehensive job of it than me; it would have been instructive to review his findings.

[Perhaps we can talk him into posting them here.... ]

"Perhaps we can talk him [JA] into posting them here.... "

I seriously doubt it. JA is a businessman, not a hobbyist who caters to the geeky niche market of audiophiles who look for endless ways to get rid of money they don't have bying things they don't need that wouldn't make them happy for very long if they had them. (At least when Jack sold the cow for a bag of magic beans the next day he had a beanstalk to climb.) The last thing in the world JA wants is to generate interest in these retro products for which there is little potential profit from advertisers and almost no profit from newsstand sales or subscriptions.

JA is rather laconic. At Audio Asylum he uses a very soft sell (all their sponsors do, its in the rules) where he doesn't directly advertise his magazine but will occasionaly answer questions about it or what's in it.

I don't think Breuninger will find it easy to get another job as a paid audio equipment reviewer. It doesn't require much skill and what skill it does demand is that of a writer, not technical skill. After all how many ways can you say that the current piece of equipment being reviewed is the best of its kind you ever saw or heard. And who would be interested in hearing the truth anyway? How quickly would people get bored reading over and over again something like "This is the 40th preamplifier I've reviewed in the last 5 years, it measured perfectly and if I walked into a room where a recording was being played and didn't see it, I couldn't guess if it was using this one or one of the other 39 if my life depended on it."

On the other hand, given the state of this industry and of the economy, Breuninger can probably console himself that JA didn't pay him very much anyway. I hope he didn't quit his day job.