AR7 upgrade or not

[vmulone]

Hi everybody, I'm Vincenzo from Rome (Italy), and I'm new to the forum. It's a wonderful source of information, thanks for sharing!

I've been surfing these pages in the last days as I happened to be gifted with two AR7 speakers. They were in not too bad shape, and I had the woofers refoamed and the tweeters repaired.

I have (excluding sources) a yamaha C60 preamp coupled with a virtue audio one.2 in power amplifier mode (it's a D-class amp capable of 2X50W@8Ohm) and a pair of Thiel CS 1.2 floorstanding speakers. My room dimensions are 18'X12'X10' (WxLxH), and it has some openings to other rooms.

My listening area is however quite compact, as the speakers with the listening spot make a 7' side triangle, and they are 3' off the wall (over the long side of the room). When I listen to the AR7 they are mounted on 15'' stands. I listen to music at a 90db level peak or so, and I like every style of music, but primarily classical.

At the beginning I was thinking of keeping the AR7 in my bedroom in a second system, but as long as I spent time with them I realized that they are quite special, even if compared with the Thiels (!)

One of the things I like most of the AR7 is their capability of disappearing, giving room to a wonderfully spaced soundstage and great focus on the players, especially with small acoustic groups. They are also quite brilliant if compared to the Thiels in the midrange, and again compared to the Thiels they sound more distant. I like much more having them in stands rather than close to the wall, although I know this is not the placement they were designed for. So I have to expect a little weaker bass response. If compared to the Thiels, what they lack is punch in the bottom end. Also, Thiels have 52 Hz@-2db FR, and thus they have not that bass extension, but you know, specs are often misleading when it comes to the character in the bass compartment.

So my dilemma is: would the bigger AR speakers maintain this magic soundstage in my listening space and room, while giving more bass punch and greater low frequency extension? I've seen the frequency response of the AR6 seems wider in the bottom end, and my dream, reading in the pages of the forum, would be to have someday the 12'' 3-way designs (AR10pi,11 or 3a). I suspect however that, the 12'' 3way speakers listened from such a small distance, may give a lack of integration of the drivers, while the AR7 are perfectly integrated right now in my listening space.

The reason I ask you more experienced guys this question, is that it's not easy to go listen a pair of perfectly working vintage speakers in my area and compare them with my restored AR7.

As a final note, I have to tell you that these AR7 are wonderful speakers, and the bottom line is that I like them better than the Thiels which are very respected audiophile speakers of a higher price class. This is the proof that in hi-fi we need to trust only our ears...

Thank you very much in advance for your replies and happy 2017 everyone! Vincenzo

 

[JKent]

Ciao Vincenzo and welcome to the forum!

From your description of your room and musical tastes, I think the AR-7s are perfect speakers for you. But I also know the urge to upgrade! I have not listened to the AR-6 but I doubt they would be a substantial upgrade compared to the 7. A better choice might be the 2ax or 5, with the 10" woofers or even the 3 or 3a (or one of the later 12" woofer speakers). I don't think they would disappoint! I don't know what prices and availability are like in Italy, but here the 12" speakers are much more expensive than the 10". I happen to like the AR-2ax very much--especially the early ones with the cast aluminum woofer--and they can be a real bargain compared to the 3a.

When I visited Rome I had the pleasure of meeting CSP member Adriano (his screen name here is Sonnar) but it was a much too brief meeting. I hope he will comment on your question. He has some AR-3s and, I believe 3a's. He has commented that he has friends with AR-6s. He could give you some good advice.

-Kent

[Sonnar]

Hello Vincenzo, I ' m Adriano and I know very well AR original classic models. I have two AR 3 pairs and a pair of AR 3a , and I ' ve had AR 10 Pi and LST for many years . I have two cousins with AR 7 and AR 18 , tiny little giants that needs a lot of power to give their best performance. I live in Rome, so if You want to call me at 335 7236305 ( or whatsapp if You have it )  I'll be very pleased to help You. Adriano

[michiganpat]

a better choice might be to keep the 7's and augment with a subwoofer.  when I still had a job with a separate office, the last configuration I had was my marantz 2230 receiver, with AR18's on the "main" (a) channel outputs (which are essentially the same as your 7's) running full range, and a passive sub I built from a dual 8ohm voice coil subwoofer that was low passed at about 120hz hooked up to the "remote" (b) channel.  sounded fabulous.  if you want to try something diffferent speaker wise, I'd look for some AR 94's which are 2.5 ways, with essentially an AR18 with a second woofer low passed at about 200hz to augment the low end.  or if you want newer, I had some AR Holographic Imaging M5's which were fantastic as well.

[vmulone]

Thank you all for your (very quick) comments and help!

The AR-2ax seems a good suggestion, as a compromise between the 2 way and the 12'' 3 way designs. I was wondering whether the equilibrium in the mid-to-treble range of the AR7 would be somehow maintained.

The subwoofer seems interesting: I was wondering whether the imaging of the speakers would be somehow affected.

I suspect that the AR-94 are too large for my listening area.

Regarding the Holographic Imaging M5, they seem pretty rare especially in Italy.

Thank you all again! And I'd be glad of reading further comments! Ciao, Vincenzo

[michiganpat]

imaging shouldn't be affected....frequencies under 180-200hz are mostly non-directional.  the sub can be tucked off in the corner to fill in those bottom few octaves....

the AR94's would essentially be the same as a 7 with sub reinforcement

I've tried 2ax's near field in my old office, which was 10x10, with a 6' desk, with the speakers outboard of it, and me sitting at the desk in a triangular arrangement, where I was 4-5' from the speakers, and it didn't do much for me....bass was nice, but they seemed lifeless compared to the 18's

[JKent]

26 minutes ago, michiganpat said:

it didn't do much for me....

Well, we all have our own tastes and of course every room is different. I like the 2ax and many of our friends here like the 5. But the OP's best bet may be to visit our friend Adriano and listen to some bigger ARs.

 

6 hours ago, michiganpat said:

a better choice might be to keep the 7's and augment with a subwoofer.

I agree completely. Some audiophiles turn their noses up at subs but I have always been a fan. I'm still using a VMPS Large Sub that I bought as a kit back in the '80s. Used it then with a bridged Hafler 220 (also a kit) and an AudioControl Richter Scale 3 electronic crossover to augment my Allison: Fours. The Hafler, Richter Scale and Allisons are gone but I added a plate amp to the VMPS and now use it with my Cizek KA-1s. But I digress. Yes--if he loves the 7s (and what's not to love?) add a sub for more bottom end.

-Kent

[vmulone]

Dear all

Yesterday I had a brief talk over the phone with Adriano:he's such a gentleman and offered to host me and my AR-7 in his place to have a comparative listen with his speakers.

Thanks Kent for suggesting that, I think this would be very beneficial to realize how different are the bigger AR speakers with respect to imaging and bass. Also, Adriano's room is similarly sized to mine.

In general I suspect (I may be wrong easily) that the front surface and depth of the speakers in a tiny listening area are very important toward imaging. Thiels are in fact known as floorstanding speakers imaging well, but they kind of hide the space behind the speakers in my listening area. Perhaps they can perform much better in a wider space. Of course there are trade-offs and thus Thiels have more impact in the bass region, again due to their physical dimensions.

Regarding the subwoofer option I'd like to try it out very much as you guys suggested. However in symphonic programs I can tell that double bass sound comes from behind on a side, and the first octave is in the 42-84 Hz range. Same in some jazz trio recordings such as Bill Evans Vanguard sessions. But again, you never know if you don't give it a try.

So we'll have this test and of course let you guys know. I think we would need some days to get it arranged due to general duties...

Thank you all again!Vincenzo

[michiganpat]

17 hours ago, JKent said:

Well, we all have our own tastes and of course every room is different. I like the 2ax and many of our friends here like the 5. But the OP's best bet may be to visit our friend Adriano and listen to some bigger ARs.

 

I think it was more my layout.....being ~4' from the speakers, the 2ax's just didn't feel as coherent as the 18's, smaller advents, or holographic imaging M5's I had used at various points in that setup.  had they been in my living room, sitting a bit further away, it might have been different...

 

[michiganpat]

4 hours ago, vmulone said:

Regarding the subwoofer option I'd like to try it out very much as you guys suggested. However in symphonic programs I can tell that double bass sound comes from behind on a side, and the first octave is in the 42-84 Hz range. Same in some jazz trio recordings such as Bill Evans Vanguard sessions. But again, you never know if you don't give it a try.

So we'll have this test and of course let you guys know. I think we would need some days to get it arranged due to general duties...

Thank you all again!Vincenzo

you might be suprised....the directionalness (is that a word) of the bass sounds may not be those bottom octaves, but rather higher frequency harmonics that would come out of the main speakers anyway.

[vmulone]

I've done a simple test with test-tones generated at 50,60 and 100Hz using the balance at the preamp hearing first the left and then the right channels only.

You are definitely right that the 50Hz signal is non directional. The 60 Hz signal is kind of in between and for the 100 Hz one you can definitely tell that it comes from the speaker.

However only a test with a sub may tell me if it works.

Thanks!Vincenzo

[Rich W]

On Thursday, January 05, 2017 at 5:07 AM, vmulone said:

Hi everybody, I'm Vincenzo from Rome (Italy), and I'm new to the forum. It's a wonderful source of information, thanks for sharing!

I've been surfing these pages in the last days as I happened to be gifted with two AR7 speakers. They were in not too bad shape, and I had the woofers refoamed and the tweeters repaired.

I have (excluding sources) a yamaha C60 preamp coupled with a virtue audio one.2 in power amplifier mode (it's a D-class amp capable of 2X50W@8Ohm) and a pair of Thiel CS 1.2 floorstanding speakers. My room dimensions are 18'X12'X10' (WxLxH), and it has some openings to other rooms.

My listening area is however quite compact, as the speakers with the listening spot make a 7' side triangle, and they are 3' off the wall (over the long side of the room). When I listen to the AR7 they are mounted on 15'' stands. I listen to music at a 90db level peak or so, and I like every style of music, but primarily classical.

At the beginning I was thinking of keeping the AR7 in my bedroom in a second system, but as long as I spent time with them I realized that they are quite special, even if compared with the Thiels (!)

One of the things I like most of the AR7 is their capability of disappearing, giving room to a wonderfully spaced soundstage and great focus on the players, especially with small acoustic groups. They are also quite brilliant if compared to the Thiels in the midrange, and again compared to the Thiels they sound more distant. I like much more having them in stands rather than close to the wall, although I know this is not the placement they were designed for. So I have to expect a little weaker bass response. If compared to the Thiels, what they lack is punch in the bottom end. Also, Thiels have 52 Hz@-2db FR, and thus they have not that bass extension, but you know, specs are often misleading when it comes to the character in the bass compartment.

So my dilemma is: would the bigger AR speakers maintain this magic soundstage in my listening space and room, while giving more bass punch and greater low frequency extension? I've seen the frequency response of the AR6 seems wider in the bottom end, and my dream, reading in the pages of the forum, would be to have someday the 12'' 3-way designs (AR10pi,11 or 3a). I suspect however that, the 12'' 3way speakers listened from such a small distance, may give a lack of integration of the drivers, while the AR7 are perfectly integrated right now in my listening space.

The reason I ask you more experienced guys this question, is that it's not easy to go listen a pair of perfectly working vintage speakers in my area and compare them with my restored AR7.

As a final note, I have to tell you that these AR7 are wonderful speakers, and the bottom line is that I like them better than the Thiels which are very respected audiophile speakers of a higher price class. This is the proof that in hi-fi we need to trust only our ears...

Thank you very much in advance for your replies and happy 2017 everyone! Vincenzo

 

Hello  Vincenzo.   Welcome to the forum!   Congratulations on receiving such a wonderful gift.  The AR-7 is truly a first-class speaker, and your description of their sound echos my own description on these pages quite a few years ago - that uncanny ability to sonically "disappear" in a room, with a superb soundstage and sense of space.  

I've had great success using my AR-7's on stands.  My room dimensions are 15' X 38' X 8'.  The speakers were installed along the short wall, each speaker 30" from the floor and 18" from each longer wall side (measured to the center of the woofer), and approximately 45" forward into the room from the back (short) wall.  The sound field 20' back is outstanding.  Although using the 7's on stands and not on a bookshelf against a wall  offers little in the way of bass reinforcement, the actual bass response at this  "sweet spot" is pretty good. 

I've also run a pair of AR-3a's in the same room, placed at virtually the same location.  My experience underscores what you had suspected - when listening in close proximity,  say 6' to 10' out, the AR-7's actually sound more integrated than the 3a's.  However, once you're in what is commonly called the "free field" (the location 20' out) the 3a's demonstrate their authority in every respect, especially at higher volume levels.   So, much depends on your listening location and how loud you listen  to your music as to whether a pair of 3a's will give you a satisfying listening experience in your space.

I've  attached a set of frequency response curves comparing the AR-7 to the AR-3a.  They were taken at the 20' location, which yields  the overall flatest response in my room.  The AR-3a is yellow, AR-7 is purple.  Left and right channels were averaged.  Differences  (aside from the 1.6 k bump on the 7's) are what you would expect  at the lowest and highest frequencies.  Actually, the HF rolloff on the 7s is not as severe as it seems, owing to differences in the RTA software's house curve I established when measuring the speakers at different times.

On the low end, note that the 7's are only 4 dB down relative to the 3a's at 50 hz.  They hold their own at an average  of 8dB down from 30 to 40hz.   Due to my room augmenting the low bass, relative to a -10 dB reference point on the graph, the 7s are flat at 50 hz and down only 5 dB 30 to 40 hz.   I've improved this even further with a modest boost of 3dB on my 31-band equalizer at 31 and 40 hz.  You can literally get an AR-7 to respond to a sub-contra C organ note (31.5 hz) with bass that can be felt - the caveat  being that you can only do this at low to moderate  listening levels - such are the limitations of physics for such a small but amazing speaker!

Hope this helps.

All the best,

Rich W

 

 

[Rich W]

16 hours ago, michiganpat said:

you might be suprised....the directionalness (is that a word) of the bass sounds may not be those bottom octaves, but rather higher frequency harmonics that would come out of the main speakers anyway.

Absolutely agree.  I ran a pair of Baby Advent II's, which have virtually no bass below 60 hz, with a subwoofer offset and located next to the left speaker.  There were no issues with imaging, and the string basses still emanated from the right channel, with the upper harmonics giving the location cues, and the low bass being non-directional.

[vmulone]

5 hours ago, Rich W said:

Hello  Vincenzo.   Welcome to the forum!   Congratulations on receiving such a wonderful gift.  The AR-7 is truly a first-class speaker, and your description of their sound echos my own description on these pages quite a few years ago - that uncanny ability to sonically "disappear" in a room, with a superb soundstage and sense of space.  

I've had great success using my AR-7's on stands.  My room dimensions are 15' X 38' X 8'.  The speakers were installed along the short wall, each speaker 30" from the floor and 18" from each longer wall side (measured to the center of the woofer), and approximately 45" forward into the room from the back (short) wall.  The sound field 20' back is outstanding.  Although using the 7's on stands and not on a bookshelf against a wall  offers little in the way of bass reinforcement, the actual bass response at this  "sweet spot" is pretty good. 

I've also run a pair of AR-3a's in the same room, placed at virtually the same location.  My experience underscores what you had suspected - when listening in close proximity,  say 6' to 10' out, the AR-7's actually sound more integrated than the 3a's.  However, once you're in what is commonly called the "free field" (the location 20' out) the 3a's demonstrate their authority in every respect, especially at higher volume levels.   So, much depends on your listening location and how loud you listen  to your music as to whether a pair of 3a's will give you a satisfying listening experience in your space.

I've  attached a set of frequency response curves comparing the AR-7 to the AR-3a.  They were taken at the 20' location, which yields  the overall flatest response in my room.  The AR-3a is yellow, AR-7 is purple.  Left and right channels were averaged.  Differences  (aside from the 1.6 k bump on the 7's) are what you would expect  at the lowest and highest frequencies.  Actually, the HF rolloff on the 7s is not as severe as it seems, owing to differences in the RTA software's house curve I established when measuring the speakers at different times.

On the low end, note that the 7's are only 4 dB down relative to the 3a's at 50 hz.  They hold their own at an average  of 8dB down from 30 to 40hz.   Due to my room augmenting the low bass, relative to a -10 dB reference point on the graph, the 7s are flat at 50 hz and down only 5 dB 30 to 40 hz.   I've improved this even further with a modest boost of 3dB on my 31-band equalizer at 31 and 40 hz.  You can literally get an AR-7 to respond to a sub-contra C organ note (31.5 hz) with bass that can be felt - the caveat  being that you can only do this at low to moderate  listening levels - such are the limitations of physics for such a small but amazing speaker!

Hope this helps.

All the best,

Rich W

 

 

Rich, thank you very much for your detailed and very helpful comments.

The 32Hz C note is exactly what you hear at the beginning of "Also Sprach Zarathustra" by R. Strauss, and I can definitely tell that the AR-7 produces that sound, although once the other instruments come into play, the low end gets (obviously) less evident 

You are very lucky to have such an amazing listening room (I'm envious actually :-)!). I'm pretty amazed on the capabilities of the AR-7 to produce a big sound field in such a large room!

Also, I saw some of your previously posted comments on the AR-17 compared to the AR-7. What intrigues me is the frequency response that lies in between the AR-3a and the AR-7 in the bottom end region. Can you tell us more about the differences of those two speakers in the mid-to-treble department and imaging? (or perhaps you've already commented about that in another post I'm not aware of...in that case I'm sorry for the question).

Another question is on the impact of bass in the bottom end region: how would AR-3a, AR-17 and AR-7 compare in terms of bass punch/speed/articulation ?

Finally, how do you think AR-17 may compare to AR-6? I've seen AR-17 are in general cheaper than AR-6 and perhaps may be found in better shape...

All my questions basically refer to near field listening, i.e. what I would hear in my listening space.

Thank you so much in advance! Best regards, Vincenzo

 

[Rich W]

On Saturday, January 07, 2017 at 6:15 AM, vmulone said:

Rich, thank you very much for your detailed and very helpful comments.

The 32Hz C note is exactly what you hear at the beginning of "Also Sprach Zarathustra" by R. Strauss, and I can definitely tell that the AR-7 produces that sound, although once the other instruments come into play, the low end gets (obviously) less evident 

You are very lucky to have such an amazing listening room (I'm envious actually :-)!). I'm pretty amazed on the capabilities of the AR-7 to produce a big sound field in such a large room!

Also, I saw some of your previously posted comments on the AR-17 compared to the AR-7. What intrigues me is the frequency response that lies in between the AR-3a and the AR-7 in the bottom end region. Can you tell us more about the differences of those two speakers in the mid-to-treble department and imaging? (or perhaps you've already commented about that in another post I'm not aware of...in that case I'm sorry for the question).

Another question is on the impact of bass in the bottom end region: how would AR-3a, AR-17 and AR-7 compare in terms of bass punch/speed/articulation ?

Finally, how do you think AR-17 may compare to AR-6? I've seen AR-17 are in general cheaper than AR-6 and perhaps may be found in better shape...

All my questions basically refer to near field listening, i.e. what I would hear in my listening space.

Thank you so much in advance! Best regards, Vincenzo

 

Hi Vincenzo,

Happy to help out best I can. Regarding the AR-17, my experience is that they image at least as good as the AR-7, and better than the AR-3a in near-field listening  situations.  This is no suprise since rhe AR-17 uses essentially the same woofer as the AR-7, and an updated version of the 1 1/4 inch tweeter with a slightly larger magnet and ferro fluid in the voice coil gap to aid in cooling.  As you can see from the graph your referring to, its high frequency response is more extended as well.  Low bass is more extended due to its larger cabinet size.  The AR-17 exhibited the flatest response I've ever measured in my listening room.

The AR-17 is the next generation version of the AR-6/AR-4xa, as the AR-18 follows the AR-7.  It is likewise a superb speaker.  

As far as producing a "you are there" sound field, there is something to keep in mind with the AR-17 - it is an extremely accurate speaker, but it is on the bright side when compared to earlier generation AR offerings.  Therefore, and especially when listening in the near field, you should decrease the tweeter level and probably also roll off the highs a bit at your amplifier.  For classical music, this will give you more of an "6th row" concert hall experience.  This illusion is easily destroyed by a hot treble, which many of today's classical music recordings exhibit due to close micing techniques.  Speakers with flat treble response only exacerbate this quality, even though they are technically more accurate.  I even run my AR-7's with the tweeter set to "Normal" rather than "Flat", along with a modest additional roll off from my graphic equalizer.

As far as the AR -17 compared to an AR-6, I would consider them equivalent, with the above caveat regarding the hotter treble.  Aesthetics is another matter.  I prefer the beige linen grills of the classic series  to the acoustically transparent foam of the next generation ADD series.

Regarding the bass quality of the 7/17/3a, I would say that the 7 and 17 are "tight", and may almost seem bass-shy - until you play a recording with real bass!  They will not add anything to the sound, especially in the bass region, if it isn't on the recording.  In contrast,  the AR-3a has a tendency to sound a bit "thick" on occasion.  In my room, I use a graphic equalizer to tame the bottom octave. Don't  get me wrong - I love the AR-3a.  But its bass can easily overpower a smaller room.

I've been having some fun with a restored pair of first generation AR-2ax's (cloth surround alnico woofers).  I've found that they sound better (i.e. present a better sound stage) in the near field than my 3a's.  In the far field the 3a's still reign supreme.  I haven't come to any conclusions whether they sound as good as or better than the 7's and 17's closer in.  It's a closer call.

Best Regards,

Rich W

[vmulone]

5 hours ago, Rich W said:

Hi Vincenzo,

Happy to help out best I can. Regarding the AR-17, my experience is that they image at least as good as the AR-7, and better than the AR-3a in near-field listening  situations.  This is no suprise since rhe AR-17 uses essentially the same woofer as the AR-7, and an updated version of the 1 1/4 inch tweeter with a slightly larger magnet and ferro fluid in the voice coil gap to aid in cooling.  As you can see from the graph your referring to, its high frequency response is more extended as well.  Low bass is more extended due to its larger cabinet size.  The AR-17 exhibited the flatest response I've ever measured in my listening room.

The AR-17 is the next generation version of the AR-6/AR-4xa, as the AR-18 follows the AR-7.  It is likewise a superb speaker.  

As far as producing a "you are there" sound field, there is something to keep in mind with the AR-17 - it is an extremely accurate speaker, but it is on the bright side when compared to earlier generation AR offerings.  Therefore, and especially when listening in the near field, you should decrease the tweeter level and probably also roll off the highs a bit at your amplifier.  For classical music, this will give you more of an "6th row" concert hall experience.  This illusion is easily destroyed by a hot treble, which many of today's classical music recordings exhibit due to close micing techniques.  Speakers with flat treble response only exacerbate this quality, even though they are technically more accurate.  I even run my AR-7's with the tweeter set to "Normal" rather than "Flat", along with a modest additional roll off from my graphic equalizer.

As far as the AR -17 compared to an AR-6, I would consider them equivalent, with the above caveat regarding the hotter treble.  Aesthetics is another matter.  I prefer the beige linen grills of the classic series  to the acoustically transparent foam of the next generation ADD series.

Regarding the bass quality of the 7/17/3a, I would say that the 7 and 17 are "tight", and may almost seem bass-shy - until you play a recording with real bass!  They will not add anything to the sound, especially in the bass region, if it isn't on the recording.  In contrast,  the AR-3a has a tendency to sound a bit "thick" on occasion.  In my room, I use a graphic equalizer to tame the bottom octave. Don't  get me wrong - I love the AR-3a.  But its bass can easily overpower a smaller room.

I've been having some fun with a restored pair of first generation AR-2ax's (cloth surround alnico woofers).  I've found that they sound better (i.e. present a better sound stage) in the near field than my 3a's.  In the far field the 3a's still reign supreme.  I haven't come to any conclusions whether they sound as good as or better than the 7's and 17's closer in.  It's a closer call.

Best Regards,

Rich W

Hi Rich,

thank you very much for your detailed answers. Listening the AR-3's and AR-3a's will for sure give me better insight, and then I'll come back to you.

Also your comments on the AR-2ax's with respect to the near field soundstage presentation are very interesting.

Best regards, thanks again. Vincenzo

[Sonnar]

In my experience, a bad response in low frequencies by AR 3a means a bad or too weak amplifier. AR 3 and 3a are a very difficult load : the one and the only speaker able to start the fast speed fan on my Amcron PSA-2 ( 600 watts per channel on 2 ohms ) and the one and the only that easily drives my QSC pro amp toward clipping with low frequency high dynamic transients . No vintage SS amps to drive correctly AR 3/3a and not underpower them . If You feed it with a powerful , stable, modern power amp You 'll get a full range speaker that beats every satellite plus subwoofer. Cheers, Adriano

[jurgen59]

Hi Guys,

 

I'am an AR adept for ages as well as a fan of italian cars, living in Holland  I have a small contribution to this post

I've started a long time ago with AR-7 (at the age of 16, now I'am 57), gone for ages.

Some years ago I was looking again for AR's and found a lot in Holland,

Started with 4AX the a set of 2A, a set of 7'ns, later a set of MST's and LST's, at the end I also bought a set of 3A's, and a Chronos W38.

Last 5 years prices have gone up, I bought the LST's for 800 euro per set , some perfect, some restauration projects. 

As a  amplifier i first used a Denon 2x50 watt version, but  found out it was to small.

Searching for a while a came to Denon 6600a, about 350W RMS at 6 ohm (as the LST's are)

These are for me the perfect drivers for both the LST's as the 3A.

Very basic mono-blocks, fit for the job, never want to buy something else, strong, clear sound, no distortion at all, even at the highest level (I ones went them flat-out in the living room with the LST's, even at the street it was loud) 

Available at Ebay / Marktplaats at about 1000 euro a set, if you find it to much you can also consider 4400's, they are less powerfull but alsomore affordable

Hope it contributed something

 

Regards 

 

Jurgen Prinsen

 

 

[vmulone]

1 hour ago, jurgen59 said:

Hi Guys,

 

I'am an AR adept for ages as well as a fan of italian cars, living in Holland  I have a small contribution to this post

I've started a long time ago with AR-7 (at the age of 16, now I'am 57), gone for ages.

Some years ago I was looking again for AR's and found a lot in Holland,

Started with 4AX the a set of 2A, a set of 7'ns, later a set of MST's and LST's, at the end I also bought a set of 3A's, and a Chronos W38.

Last 5 years prices have gone up, I bought the LST's for 800 euro per set , some perfect, some restauration projects. 

As a  amplifier i first used a Denon 2x50 watt version, but  found out it was to small.

Searching for a while a came to Denon 6600a, about 350W RMS at 6 ohm (as the LST's are)

These are for me the perfect drivers for both the LST's as the 3A.

Very basic mono-blocks, fit for the job, never want to buy something else, strong, clear sound, no distortion at all, even at the highest level (I ones went them flat-out in the living room with the LST's, even at the street it was loud) 

Available at Ebay / Marktplaats at about 1000 euro a set, if you find it to much you can also consider 4400's, they are less powerfull but alsomore affordable

Hope it contributed something

 

Regards 

 

Jurgen Prinsen

 

 

Hi Jurgen, thank you very much for your contribution. Seems you're rather expert about the classic AR speakers, as you have had a lot of different designs.

I wanted to ask you more details about the room you're listening in, and some general comments (if you can/want) on the differences among the different speakers you've owned.

Thanks again ciao! Vincenzo

[vmulone]

Hi guys,

yesterday at night we had a first meeting with Adriano. We tried and test his AR-3's and AR-3a's along with my AR-7's, with some mixed music (pop/rock, opera and jazz).

We need to go ahead with testing as it was late and we couldn't listen too loud for much of the time; however, my first conclusions are that the AR-3's and AR-3a's have a massive impact (electric bass, kick-drum), that is simply unimaginable to have with the AR-7s. This is also given with a much more extended frequency response and a great control in attack and decay of bass lines (despite their impact). 

On the other hand, and especially in Adriano's room, the soundstage of the AR-3's and AR-3a's is not as developed as with the AR-7's. When we switched to the AR-7s the music was presented all behind the disappeared speakers which, like I said, is the characteristic that had me falling in love with these tiny speakers. Also, the bass was very controlled and enojoyable: all in all the AR-7s seemed to give a kind of scaled down presentation of the AR-3's and AR-3a's (which somehow a good point I guess...). Of course frequency response is less extended and impact is "much more gentle".

However we'll have more meetings and let you guys know; for now it seems to me that 12'' woofer 3-way designs are too much for my room to have a similar soundstage to my AR-7's.

Ciao! Vincenzo

[michiganpat]

sounds like you need to try out some subwoofer augmentation to the 7's....

[Sonnar]

AR 3 and 3a are BIG speakers and they sounds big, in particular if You drive 'em with powerful big amps like my Crown  Macro Tech and QSC : unfortunately my room is too small for big speakers , and surely I have some loss in perspective : however , AR 3/3a aren't the biggest speakers in my room , I have also a pair of Altec 846b Valencias , a real big and impressive speaker. 27 years ago I bought a pair of ProAc Tablette, fascinated by their wide, exceptional soundstage in small rooms : but quickly I was unsatisfied by their poor bass response ( surely AR 7 shows deeper and powerful bass ) and their dynamic weakness . Theoretically doesn 't have much sense to use 2 Kw power amps and big speakers in a small room, but in my 42 years experience big is better than small, in fact I 'm planning to run with my four AR 3 all together with QSC and Crown Macro Tech power amps . So my advice is, buy the biggest thing Your money can afford . I have a friend who lives in Milano in a very small attic , one small room with kitchen and bed inside and he sleeps between two HUGE Electro Voice Patrician 800 ( 30" woofers ) .  Cheers, Adriano

[Sonnar]

On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 10:13 AM, jurgen59 said:

Hi Guys,

 

I'am an AR adept for ages as well as a fan of italian cars, living in Holland  I have a small contribution to this post

I've started a long time ago with AR-7 (at the age of 16, now I'am 57), gone for ages.

Some years ago I was looking again for AR's and found a lot in Holland,

Started with 4AX the a set of 2A, a set of 7'ns, later a set of MST's and LST's, at the end I also bought a set of 3A's, and a Chronos W38.

Last 5 years prices have gone up, I bought the LST's for 800 euro per set , some perfect, some restauration projects. 

As a  amplifier i first used a Denon 2x50 watt version, but  found out it was to small.

Searching for a while a came to Denon 6600a, about 350W RMS at 6 ohm (as the LST's are)

These are for me the perfect drivers for both the LST's as the 3A.

Very basic mono-blocks, fit for the job, never want to buy something else, strong, clear sound, no distortion at all, even at the highest level (I ones went them flat-out in the living room with the LST's, even at the street it was loud) 

Available at Ebay / Marktplaats at about 1000 euro a set, if you find it to much you can also consider 4400's, they are less powerfull but alsomore affordable

Hope it contributed something

 

Regards 

 

Jurgen Prinsen

 

 

Sorry for the OT , Jurgen, do You know this car? One of the rarest and the most beautiful GT italian cars. Bizzarrini 5300 GT Strada. 

[fedeleluigi]

On 05 gennaio 2017 at 11:07 AM, vmulone said:

So my dilemma is: would the bigger AR speakers maintain this magic soundstage in my listening space and room, while giving more bass punch and greater low frequency extension? I've seen the frequency response of the AR6 seems wider in the bottom end, and my dream, reading in the pages of the forum, would be to have someday the 12'' 3-way designs (AR10pi,11 or 3a). I suspect however that, the 12'' 3way speakers listened from such a small distance, may give a lack of integration of the drivers, while the AR7 are perfectly integrated right now in my listening space.

The reason I ask you more experienced guys this question, is that it's not easy to go listen a pair of perfectly working vintage speakers in my area and compare them with my restored AR7.

As a final note, I have to tell you that these AR7 are wonderful speakers, and the bottom line is that I like them better than the Thiels which are very respected audiophile speakers of a higher price class. This is the proof that in hi-fi we need to trust only our ears...

Thank you very much in advance for your replies and happy 2017 everyone! Vincenzo

 

Hi Vincenzo,

I never listened to AR7 but I have two pairs of AR18S (not AR18) They are similar to AR7 both in cabinet and drivers.  They were often used as studio monitors, read  Ken Kentor's post  (http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/IP.Board/index.php?/topic/721-ar-loudspeakers-as-studio-monitors/) and here (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/reviews/691582-acoustic-research-inc-ar18s.html ,  http://www.celestialsounds.co.za/review-ar18s-1982/)

I have many AR loudspeaker (3a, 11, 10Pi etc) and in my opinion AR18S's have an exellent bass especially taking into account their dimensions. Obiouvsly their bass can't challenge that of old AR 12" woofer loudspeakers (when you use good amplifiers), but in comparision with that of many modern speakers, the bass of a perfect pair of AR18S is excellent and terrific. In my room I have got very good low frequency responce placing AR18S from floor level to  30-40 cm at most and about 1m or more far from the wall in front of the listening position. You can even get more bass placing the speakers back against a wall but the wonderful stereo image these speakers can exhibit will noticeably disapperar.

As AR18S are very common in Italy and they are not expensive I recommend that you listen to these speakers if you can. You could like them very much.

AR18 (older than 18S) and AR18 B and LS (younger) are different speakers but very similar. I could never listen to them but all of them together with the bigger AR6, AR17, AR25 deserve a careful listening too.

 

All these speaker are very old so be sure their drivers are in perfect working conditions before listening and (potentially) buying!

 

PS: Check one of your AR7 woofer is not out of phase using a battery.

 

Luigi

[vmulone]

1 hour ago, fedeleluigi said:

Hi Vincenzo,

I never listened to AR7 but I have two pairs of AR18S (not AR18) They are similar to AR7 both in cabinet and drivers.  They were often used as studio monitors, read  Ken Kentor's post  (http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/IP.Board/index.php?/topic/721-ar-loudspeakers-as-studio-monitors/) and here (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/reviews/691582-acoustic-research-inc-ar18s.html )

I have many AR loudspeaker (3a, 11, 10Pi etc) and in my opinion AR18S's have an exellent bass especially taking into account their dimensions. Obiouvsly their bass can't challenge that of old AR 12" woofer loudspeakers (when you use good amplifiers), but in comparision with that of many modern speakers, the bass of a perfect pair of AR18S is excellent and terrific. In my room I have got very good low frequency responce placing AR18S from floor level to  30-40 cm at most and about 1m or more far from the wall in front of the listening position. You can even get more bass placing the speakers back against a wall but the wonderful stereo image these speakers can exhibit will noticeably disapperar.

As AR18S are very common in Italy and they are not expensive I recommend that you listen to these speakers if you can. You could like them very much.

AR18 (older than 18S) and AR18 B and LS (younger) are different speakers but very similar. I could never listen to them but all of them together with the bigger AR6, AR17, AR25 deserve a careful listening too.

 

All these speaker are very old so be sure their drivers are in perfect working conditions before listening and (potentially) buying!

 

PS: Check one of your AR7 woofer is not out of phase using a battery.

 

Luigi

Hi Luigi, thanks for your contribution: I maybe wrong, but I think AR-18s should give a similar feeling of my AR-7. I also have very similar distances from both floor and wall, that tells me we pretty much have a similar experience of the imaging characteristics of such speakers.

Your PS however is pretty interesting, as I checked the polarity of my speakers and I realized that the positive is the terminal with (1). Connecting the positive terminal of the battery to (1) I thus obtained an outward motion of the woofer. Apparently it should be the opposite (i.e. (1) negative terminal) according to what I found over the internet.

However, it seemed to me, altthough I did not double check it yet, that I got a somehow more convincing response in the bass department. What's your experience about that?

Thank you all, and best regards. Vincenzo