AR-3a / AR-91 Listening Comparison

[ar_pro]

A borrowed pair of AR-3a systems has afforded the opportunity to do a comparison with the AR-91 speakers that I put together last year.

The 3a's are in decent condition, with recent surrounds on the woofers, and replacement caps for the front-wired mid & tweeter sections of the crossover. There are no labels or serial numbers present, but the cabinet is MDF, with a velcro-style attachment for the grill.

Locating the speakers on the same stands as the AR-91 was pretty straightforward, and made for relatively quick switch-over times; the differences in mid/tweeter arrangement between the systems meant that the AR-91 tweeter was about 5" higher than that of the 3a.

Listening was via WAV and FLAC files at CD standard, as well as a few 24/96 recordings, through a 200w/channel McIntosh integrated amplifier, set to run without tone controls and at a fixed volume. Both speakers had their level controls set at maximum output.

While there were significant similarities in the nature of the reproduction - a family resemblance that runs throughout most of the Classic-Era speakers - it was immediately apparent that compared to the AR-91, the overall presentation of the AR-3a was heavier in the LF region, with a spectral tilt away from the midrange and above. The immediate impression was of a powerful, extended output from the 3a woofer, but almost over-emphasized vis-à-vis the rest of the system. 

The bass response of the AR-91 was not as prominent; there seemed to be an added degree of control, or tightness that ceded maybe a bit on the very low end to the 3a woofer, but achieved a better overall balance with the 91 mid & tweeter. 

The mids & tweeters of both systems sounded very similar from 15 feet away, with slightly more output from the AR-91 tweeter. I suspect that there was not a significant difference in the output levels, but that the relative height of the 91 tweeter was at play, here.

Having read and enjoyed Roy C's evaluation of the evolution of the AR 12" woofer, and his take on the AR-9 series, I think his observations are spot-on.

I believe that the earlier AR-3a is ever-so-slightly tilted toward a gravitas that may have been adjusted out of later iterations of AR's 12" 3-way systems. The modern term is "voicing", and I'm beginning to think that this could have taken place between the last AR-3a systems, and the AR-9 series.

[amanteyzapata]

I'm so happy to hear this study!  Unfortunately, I have to be brief.  I did nearly the same comparison but with a Luxman 1050 and Ar3s.  The sound was nearly the same but the AR91s seemed more rewarding in the upper range.  I kept them even though I painstakingly restored the AR3s and sending the mids to Larry in NYC.

[owlsplace]

6 hours ago, ar_pro said:

A borrowed pair of AR-3a systems has afforded the opportunity to do a comparison with the AR-91 speakers that I put together last year.

The 3a's are in decent condition, with recent surrounds on the woofers, and replacement caps for the front-wired mid & tweeter sections of the crossover. There are no labels or serial numbers present, but the cabinet is MDF, with a velcro-style attachment for the grills.

Locating the speakers on the same stands as the AR-91 was pretty straightforward, and made for relatively quick switchover times; the differences in mid/tweeter arrangement between the systems meant that the AR-91 tweeter was about 5" higher than that of the 3a.

Listening was via WAV and FLAC files at CD standard, as well as a few 24/96 recordings, through a 200w/channel McIntosh integrated amplifier, set to run without tone controls and at a fixed volume. Both speakers had their level controls set at maximum output.

While there were significant similarities in the nature of the reproduction - a family resemblance that runs throughout most of the Classic-era speakers - it was immediately apparent that compared to the AR-91, the overall presentation of the AR-3a was heavier in the LF region, with a spectral tilt away from the midrange and above. The immediate impression was of a powerful, extended output from the 3a woofer, but almost over-emphasized vis-à-vis the rest of the system. 

The bass response of the AR-91 was not as prominent; there seemed to be an added degree of control, or tightness that ceded maybe a bit on the very low end to the 3a woofer, but achieved a better overall balance with the 91 mid & tweeter. 

The mids & tweeters of both systems sounded very similar from 15 feet away, with slightly more output from the AR-91 tweeter. I suspect that there was not a significant difference in the output levels, but that the relative height of the 91 tweeter was at play, here.

Having read and enjoyed Roy C's evaluation of the evolution of the AR 12" woofer, and his take on the AR-9 series, I think his observations are spot-on.

I believe that the earlier AR-3a is ever-so-slightly tilted toward a gravitas that may have been adjusted out of later iterations of AR's 12" 3-way systems. The modern term is "voicing", and I'm beginning to think that this could have taken place between the last AR-3a systems, and the AR-9 series.

Didn't Julian Hirsch mention a certain muddiness in the AR-3a's low end when he reviewed the AR-5? I'm guessing AR-9 era tweeters have an airiness that owners of the Classic era speakers only dreamed of based on my experience with the 58s. Personally I like being able to switch in different speakers depending on source material and mood.

I think the appeal of the Classic era speakers will wane quickly once the generation that grew up with them dies off ...

Roger

 

[Sonnar]

The AR 3 are the most important Classic , and they don' t suffer of " muddiness " in the midbass region . Their 1" dome tweeter is probably the best tweeter I 've ever heard , fast, crisp and clean. A pair of well powered AR 3 shows the best scene ever possible, with a precision, naturalness and airiness unknown by whatever dynamic speaker. After 42 years and many speakers from B&W , Kef, ProAc , Celestion , AR, Allison, Advent , Magneplanar, now four AR 3 are my main speakers and they 're the only ones that satisfies me totally. Listen  a pair of AR 3 , it's worth the try. Best regards, Adriano

[TimmyTonga]

22 hours ago, ar_pro said:

Listening was via WAV and FLAC files at CD standard, as well as a few 24/96 recordings, through a 200w/channel McIntosh integrated amplifier, set to run without tone controls and at a fixed volume. Both speakers had their level controls set at maximum output.

 

Although it might make sense to run the 3a tweeters at max because of their age/construction, I've never found that the mid-range sounds right even a small distance away from its white dot. 

[Aadams]

16 hours ago, owlsplace said:

Didn't Julian Hirsch mention a certain muddiness in the AR-3a's low end when he reviewed the AR-5? I'm guessing AR-9 era tweeters have an airiness that owners of the Classic era speakers only dreamed of based on my experience with the 58s. Personally I like being able to switch in different speakers depending on source material and mood.

I think the appeal of the Classic era speakers will wane quickly once the generation that grew up with them dies off ...

Roger

 

My 3a pair sit next my 9s.  I frequently listen to both together and separately.  It is difficult to beat a 3a if one is a lover of massed acoustic ensembles whether voice or instrument.  IMO as long as the 12” classic ARs continue to function close to spec there will always be some lover of classical music seeking them out.  That being said, I have no hard preference for one over the other and am glad to have a choice.

[onplane]

It would be hard for anyone to argue that the AR-3a's are NOT a bass heavy speaker system.  Indeed, just looking at the frequency curve provided by AR (see attached) proves that bass heavy is indeed what they are!

They don't have to be and there are ways to repair this (I bi-amp and apply more voltage to the mid and tweeter).

We must remember, however, the 3a's were intentionally designed the way they were to overcome deficiencies in phono pickup cartridges and recording techniques present at that time. This leaves the 3a's, even with the pots at full "on", bass heavy when listening to modern recordings with digital playback.

With my setup, I very much enjoy my 3a's at modest listening levels (less than 2 watts). When I desire a more robust experience at higher volume levels, I find that my AR TSW-610's really outperform my 3a's by quite a bit. Conversely, at modest levels the 3a's outperform the 610's.

There is a lesson here that when doing listening comparisons, volume levels also should play a significant role in any comparisons.

One final observation, is the natural question: "Why bother with these bass heavy speakers?  Why not just get a modern equivalent?"

For me the answer is there aren't many modern equivalents.  What AR's offer is very low distortion in the fundamental frequencies.  All of the ported systems I've listened to (and I also own some), I find that double bass reproduction lacking.  Some call it the "one note bass" symptom, but whatever it is, I find it lacking. These ported systems have to store these low frequencies for a half cycle before they release via the ports.  None of this "storing and releasing" is done by AR acoustic suspension systems.

 

 

[owlsplace]

On 9/17/2016 at 3:26 PM, ar_pro said:

......

Having read and enjoyed Roy C's evaluation of the evolution of the AR 12" woofer, and his take on the AR-9 series, I think his observations are spot-on.

I believe that the earlier AR-3a is ever-so-slightly tilted toward a gravitas that may have been adjusted out of later iterations of AR's 12" 3-way systems. The modern term is "voicing", and I'm beginning to think that this could have taken place between the last AR-3a systems, and the AR-9 series.

Do you have a link to RoyC's thread handy?

[KlausDK]

1 hour ago, owlsplace said:

Do you have a link to RoyC's thread handy?

This is not what you asked for, but Tom Tyson had an excellent overview of the AR 12" woofer evolution some (many) years ago:

Differences in the AR 12-Inch Woofer

BRgds Klaus

[dxho]

Like this?

Evolution of and Replacements for the AR 11/12" Woofer