Guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 I bought a pair of these from a neighbor and hooked them up next to my Celestion F2's and I was very pleased with the sound. I was able to find some info on the AR's through Audiogon. The link only shows the AR 93. Not sure what the "Q" designation means. Also trying to find out how much they cost new and year(s) built. Many thanks for any info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigel Posted January 23, 2003 Report Share Posted January 23, 2003 There is no real difference between the AR93 and AR93Q. I have a pair that is in line to get the 8" drivers refoamed.Classic AR speakers will perform best with powerful amplifiers capable of driving very low impedance loads. Adcom's are a good price/performance compromise.Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 25, 2003 Report Share Posted January 25, 2003 Hi and thanks for the info. Do you know when these were manufactured and the list price?I've been driving them with Sony AVR 80wpc and they are very clean!Interesting design too with the wrap around grill cloth.thanks againJim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve F Posted January 26, 2003 Report Share Posted January 26, 2003 The AR93 and 94 were introduced in late 1979, and were called the "High Tech" series, because most of their emphasis was on hard-core performance rather than flashy cosmetic frills. They were interesting designs: both utilized the 1 1/4" ferro-fluid cooled cone tweeter surrounded with strips of absorbent felt (more of an "acoustic frame," if you will, rather than the full-fledged Acoustic Blanket like in the 9, 90, 91, and 92), and they had that wrap-around sock cabinet with top caps, a cosmetic design that Definitive Technologies, Mirage, etc. copied some 15 years later.The 93 used dual side-facing 8" woofers, a forward facing 8" midrange, and the tweeter.The 94 was especially clever--it had dual forward-facing 8" woofers, and the tweeter, but only one of the woofers continued up into the midrange. The lower woofer was rolled off around 350Hz, to avoid excessive midrange interference with the other woofer. The 93 was probably the industry's first "2 1/2-way" system, a configuration that has become rather popular among good speaker designers in the last few years.The AR94 received a truly outstanding review in the October 1980 issue of High Fidelity. "Frankly, we were surprised at just how impressive the AR-94's tonal reach and balance proved to be...to the deepest organ fundamentals, we were mightily impressed with the unit's ability to put out clean, articulate bass...High frequencies...are handled with clarity and verve."At the time of their introduction, the 93 was $250 ea. list; the 94 was $200 ea. Excellent speakers.Steve F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigel Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 >I've been driving them with Sony AVR 80wpc Hi Jim;I am not certain about the Sony's ability to drive very low impedance loads. The 93/94 can drop to around 2 ohms. You should check your owners manual. The receiver will most likely protect itself, but you are not hearing the full potential of your speakers.An amp with at least double the power, and very low impedance capabilities will really let your speakers shine. I recently corresponded with a person with a similar receiver to yours, driving AR11 (actually easier to drive than your AR93's). He was pretty pleased with it, like you. Then he tried a used Adcom 555, and could not beleive the improvement.My experience has been that power is more important on quiet sections than loud sections. Some of Dr Bose's supports this. (I don't like the company, but the Dr has done some very impressive work in acoustics).Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve F Posted January 28, 2003 Report Share Posted January 28, 2003 Actually, the 94 was a pretty easy load for any decent amp. According to High Fidelity's test report, following the rise at resonance at 55Hz, the impedance reached a minimum of about 5 ohms at 150Hz, rose smoothly to about 10 ohms at 3kHz, and settled down to a little under 6 ohms from 10kHz on out. This is about as "nominal" an 8-ohm speaker as it gets, and definitely not a tough speaker to drive.The 93, with its paralled side-firing 8" woofers overlapping with the 8" forward-facing midrange, may have been a more difficult load. But I've never seen a test report on the 93, so I can't confirm the 2-ohm minimum on that speaker. The 94, however, was not even close to 2 ohms.Regardless, none of this changes the thought that all things being equal, a better amp is a good thing.Steve F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToastedAlmond Posted January 29, 2003 Report Share Posted January 29, 2003 Steve, Smooth. Speaking like a true statesman there pal! George Did I just say something? Damn these ears! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.