Steve F Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Classic Speakers AR should have made Certainly, the bane of AR during the 1969-1977 timeframe (which was the very height of the stereo market boom) was the Large Advent. A very formidable speaker: great bass, virtually the equal of the 3a; an agreeable mid-hi balance and tonality that sounded clear, detailed and pleasing on most program material and most musical genres. Neither too bright like the JBLs nor too dull like the ARs. As I’ve detailed in past posts, AR could have gone in two different directions to produce a speaker that could do battle with the OLA, and done so without tooling new parts or incurring any great delay in time-to-market. Here are two ways they could have gone: 1. A “super” 2ax with 12-inch woofer. Compared to the 5, a “2ax+” would have a more expensive woofer (+$10 wholesale), but would’ve more than made up for it with a far less expensive mid (-$20 wholesale net difference between the 3 ½” cone and the 1 ½” dome) and far less expensive x-over (-$15 wholesale). Yeah, ok add in around $5 for the very slightly more expensive 12”-sized enclosure and woofer-mounting hardware, but a “super 2ax” would still be at least $20 wholesale cost less than the AR-5, which translates into a far lower retail price than the AR-5’s $175. 2. As I posted recently here in post #13, they could have done a 12-inch 2-way with the AR-14’s 1-inch dome tweeter (although this option wasn’t available to them until around 1975.) This would also have been around a $140-150 speaker, far more attractive and saleable than the AR-5 at $175, the AR-14 at $140 or the AR-12 at $225. In addition to the Advent fighter, there were other speakers AR should have done. The LST-2 was a misfire, with its 10-inch woofer and 3 ea. 1 ½-inch mids and ¾-inch tweeters. AR always mis-read the appeal of their 12-inch woofer. The AR-5, -8, LST-2, AR-14 and AR-12 were all sales flops, mainly because at their asking price at that time in the market, they were not a particularly good value. AR 8”-based speakers were almost always a good value. AR’s 12” speakers were sought-after products, almost regardless of their asking price. But the mid-price 10” speakers from the 1970’s were not good values (except the 2ax). The LST-2 should have used the 12-inch woofer in the same enclosure as the LST. With the greater ordering quantity of those cabs, the cabinet price would have dropped. Do two 1 ½-inch mids (one ea. on each side panel) and three ¾-inch tweeters—one on each side panel and one centered on the front, above the woofer. The radiation pattern of both LSTs would be identical, unlike the “real” LST-2, which had a forward-facing mid. This proposed LST-2 would still have significant advantages over the 3a in terms of power-handling and dispersion, but would be able to come in at the $400 retail price point, far enough away from the LST’s $600 so that both made sense. The other interesting speaker AR could have done is a 3-way 8” speaker, based on the AR-6 woofer. This could have been either an “8-inch AR-5” (which would’ve one heckuva nice—but pricey—little speaker, around the same or slightly more than a 2ax) or perhaps a less expensive variant, with the either the 4x’s or 2ax’s cone driver as mid and the ¾-inch tweeter, coming in at around the retail of the 2x (~$102-110 ea.) An “8-inch 2ax” (AR-6 bass with 2ax mids and highs) might have been a very interesting product. Steve F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.