Jump to content

Janszen 130 + Acoustic Research AR-1 W


iso

Recommended Posts

Frequency response plots for the AR-1 woofer and the JansZen tweeter array.

I did a quick "google search" and came up empty handed.

Does anyone have plots of the frequency response for the AR-1 woofer and the JansZen 130?

Steven

Here is the AR-1/AR-3 woofer frequency response, one of several done on the AR woofer. As for the JansZen 130 tweeter, I don't think there were any published frequency-response graphs on that speaker, mainly because Neshaminy Electronics (JansZen) did not have an anechoic chamber in the early days.

The AR woofer was nearly perfect in its low-frequency response and distortion characteristics.

post-100160-0-72177400-1448480844_thumb.

AR-1/AR-3 woofer measurements. These tests were made outdoors facing into half-space.

post-100160-0-94217500-1448481378_thumb.

--Tom Tyson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom and ar_pro,

Thanks for the AR-1 woofer frequency plot and the instructions that JansZen provided with the Model 130.

I was interested in seeing how well the two speakers integrated, given the absence of a system crossover network. A quick look at the AR-1 woofer raw frequency response (I assume that the woofer was buried with its enclosure) shows a 2 db hump between 600-900 hz which could be reduced with a properly designed crossover. Without knowing the shape of the JansZen 130 frequency response, it's impossible at least for me to gage how well the two speaker integrate, especially if one is attemping to gain a flat on-axis response.

Happy Thanksgiving.....

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JansZen claimed 120 degrees dispersion for the Model 130 tweeter.

ar_pro,

There are no published JansZen Model 130 frequency-response curves (to my knowledge), just the "spec'd" radiation angle, pretty much determined by the shape of the enclosure itself. Do you have the actual curves themselves? It's hard to determine how actually smooth the response, but it can be assumed that the electrostatic tweeters performed well under most circumstances.

--Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom and ar_pro,

Thanks for the AR-1 woofer frequency plot and the instructions that JansZen provided with the Model 130.

I was interested in seeing how well the two speakers integrated, given the absence of a system crossover network. A quick look at the AR-1 woofer raw frequency response (I assume that the woofer was buried with its enclosure) shows a 2 db hump between 600-900 hz which could be reduced with a properly designed crossover. Without knowing the shape of the JansZen 130 frequency response, it's impossible at least for me to gage how well the two speaker integrate, especially if one is attemping to gain a flat on-axis response.

Happy Thanksgiving.....

Steve

Steve, remember, the vertical divisions are 1/2 dB. The reference level is about 1 dB above the "0" reference level shown. I know that the woofer is actually flat to within +/- 1.5 dB from 38-1000 Hz anyway, so no correction would be warranted. You would be hard-pressed to find any woofer made at any time that is flatter in that range; if there is one, I'd love to see the measurements on it (and I'm not talking about computer simulations). You can barely detect 1 dB, and this is at the very top of the operating frequency for that woofer; and most would cross over at a lower frequency when possible. The biggest problem with the top end of the woofer's output is the increasingly directional characteristic of this crossover frequency. It would be better to cross it over at 500-750 Hz if possible, not 1 kHz.

The woofer was measured free-field, with the sealed AR-1 enclosure buried flush with the ground, radiating into 2 Pi steradians, the precise way to measure the woofer. There is no practical change that could be made to the woofer's crossover that would make it appreciably flatter in output, and really the big question might first be the measured response characteristics of the JansZen tweeter.

--Tom Tyson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ar_pro,

There are no published JansZen Model 130 frequency-response curves (to my knowledge), just the "spec'd" radiation angle, pretty much determined by the shape of the enclosure itself. Do you have the actual curves themselves? It's hard to determine how actually smooth the response, but it can be assumed that the electrostatic tweeters performed well under most circumstances.

--Tom

Sorry, Tom - that's all I've seen regarding this tweeter.

Having heard them in action, I can say that the 130 could not be faulted for horizontal dispersion; their overall smoothness might be another issue.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, Tom - that's all I've seen regarding this tweeter.

Having heard them in action, I can say that the 130 could not be faulted for horizontal dispersion; their overall smoothness might be another issue.

.

Thanks. Yes, I've heard the AR-1W/JansZen 130 combination several times over the years, and the sound was very good. Some audiophiles to this day still use this combination. The electrostatic was clean and transparent, and it always had great appeal for that electrostatic "clarity" and detail. The horizontal dispersion was predictable considering the angled front face, with each panel being very directional in its forward plane. Vertical dispersion was nil due to the panel's highly directional nature. Overall, it was a good system, but power-handling was limited.

When the AR-3 came along in 1959, the AR-1W/JansZen combination began to fade into obscurity, with only a few holdouts. The AR-3 had the same clarity as the JansZen, but it had much superior dispersion and better acoustic-power response.

--Tom Tyson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. Yes, I've heard the AR-1W/JansZen 130 combination several times over the years, and the sound was very good. Some audiophiles to this day still use this combination. The electrostatic was clean and transparent, and it always had great appeal for that electrostatic "clarity" and detail. The horizontal dispersion was predictable considering the angled front face, with each panel being very directional in its forward plane. Vertical dispersion was nil due to the panel's highly directional nature. Overall, it was a good system, but power-handling was limited.

When the AR-3 came along in 1959, the AR-1W/JansZen combination began to fade into obscurity, with only a few holdouts. The AR-3 had the same clarity as the JansZen, but it had much superior dispersion and better acoustic-power response.

--Tom Tyson

When the question was asked about how well the AR-1 (usually the AR-1W) and Janszen 130 electrostatic tweeter integrated, "in the absence of a system crossover network," it should be noted that an LCR crossover network resides in the Janszen unit itself. The integration was excellent and quite seamless.

AR-1s and Janszen electrostatic had been used together for many years, and Arthur Janszen chose the AR-1 over the big Bozak (including the Concert Grand) as the preferred setup to be used with his electrostatic tweeter. Janszen subsequently joined with Henry Kloss at KLH to use the 130 with the new KLH Model One, dual-woofer system and the Model Two single-woofer systems. The big KLH setup was very expensive in those days, but it was a very good combination.

In the spring of 1956, the New York Audio League (Julian Hirsch and others) used Four AR-1 speakers, two Janszen (one 130 and one "utility" model) electrostatic tweeters and a single Bozak B-305 midrange were used together for the New York Audio League's live-vs.-recorded comparison with an Aeolian-Skinner pipe organ in Saint Mark's Episcopal Church, Mount Kisco, New York. This combination proved to be very accurate in reproducing the big pipe organ, and this made "believers" out of hundreds of audiophiles on the spot in attendance at this concert. Critical acclaim and rave reviews that followed—especially regarding the AR-1—made this AR/Janszen combination a favorite for many years that followed.

post-100160-0-31481600-1448775546_thumb.

post-100160-0-27375500-1448775569_thumb.

—Tom Tyson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Janszen subsequently joined with Henry Kloss at KLH to use the 130 with the new KLH Model One, dual-woofer system and the Model Two single-woofer systems. The big KLH setup was very expensive in those days, but it was a very good combination.

Janszen was also (single-handedly I believe) responsible for the revolutionary KLH Model Nine full-range electrostatics and for the industrial design of my favorite radio, The KLH Model Eight.

-Kent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the day, the AR1- J130 combo was described as among the best available. Listeners praised the flatness of the audible FR, with clean, clear,extended and transparent HF. On the other hand, it is telling that the demo referenced above included a dedicated Bozak midrange. Perhaps actual measurements of the AR1-J130 combo alone indicated weakness in the midrange ? Was this weakness only apparent in a large scale application, or would it be audible in a normal listening room ? I have wanted to hear this combo for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the day, the AR1- J130 combo was described as among the best available. Listeners praised the flatness of the audible FR, with clean, clear,extended and transparent HF. On the other hand, it is telling that the demo referenced above included a dedicated Bozak midrange. Perhaps actual measurements of the AR1-J130 combo alone indicated weakness in the midrange ? Was this weakness only apparent in a large scale application, or would it be audible in a normal listening room ? I have wanted to hear this combo for a long time.

"Perhaps actual measurements of the AR1-J130 combo alone indicated weakness in the midrange ? Was this weakness only apparent in a large scale application, or would it be audible in a normal listening room?"

Could you explain how you came to this conclusion? I've never seen this referred to in any of the literature on this subject, and I don't think Julian Hirsch or anyone else noted any "weakness" in the midrange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...