AR7 upgrade or not

[JKent]

2 minutes ago, vmulone said:

Apparently it should be the opposite (i.e. (1) negative terminal)

It shouldn't really batter as long as both speakers are wired the same. You can check both with a battery as described, or just try reversing the wires on one speaker and see if the bass sounds better or worse.

-Kent

[fedeleluigi]

3 hours ago, vmulone said:

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

As I said I've never listen to AR7 so I don't Know if their low frequency response is similar to AR18s's. I would think so but your speaker seem to have some deficiency in this aspect. On the contrary my AR18S have a very good and powerful bass especially in comparision with mothern speakers. I didn't listen to Thiel 1.2s but I listened to bigger Thiel models such as 2.2, 3.5, 3,6  and lot of speakers similar to your Thiel speakers and their bass never amazed me.

As regards your AR7s, it could only be  a question of enviroment but it could also be a woofer out of phase ***compared to the other one***.

 

In other words, the most important thing you have to check is that ***both*** woofers have the ***same phase*** so connecting the battery with both speakers in the identical way, the paper cones must move in the same direction. To solve a bass loss caused by out of phase connected woofers, it doesn't matter if the cones move outward or inward. It is important ***both*** move outward or inward when the battery is connected with both speakers in the same way.

 

Summary: If the cones move in the same direction when both speakers are connected with the battery in the same way the woofers are in phase between them.

 

If woofer connections should not be the same for both of them, the woofers are out of phase. One will move in, while the other moves out. When you play your speakers at the listening position (right in between the speakers) the displaced air from one will be cancelled out by the other. This effect  will result in a loss of bass. 

Luigi

[vmulone]

8 minutes ago, fedeleluigi said:

As I said I've never listen to AR7 so I don't Know if their low frequency response is similar to AR18s's. I would think so but your speaker seem to have some deficiency in this aspect. On the contrary my AR18S have a very good and powerful bass especially in comparision with mothern speakers. I didn't listen to Thiel 1.2s but I listened to bigger Thiel models such as 2.2, 3.5, 3,6  and lot of speakers similar to your Thiel speakers and their bass never amazed me.

Maybe  is a question of enviroment but it could also be a woofer out of phase ***compared to the other one***.

 

In other words, the most important thing you have to check is that ***both*** woofers have the ***same phase*** so connecting the battery with both speakers in the identical way, the paper cones must move in the same direction. To solve a bass loss caused by out of phase connected woofers, it doesn't matter if the cones move outward or inward. It is important ***both*** move outward or inward when the battery is connected with both speakers in the same way.

 

Summary: If the cones move in the same direction when both speakers are connected with the battery in the same way the woofers are in phase between them.

 

If woofer connections should not be the same for both of them, the woofers are out of phase. One will move in, while the other moves out. When you play your speakers at the listening position (right in between the speakers) the displaced air from one will be cancelled out by the other. This effect  will result in a loss of bass. 

Luigi

Luigi, perhaps I wasn't too much clear in my posts.

I can clearly feel the tight and good bass of my AR-7's even down to 40Hz, of course with some level decrease reasonably in agreement with their FR response curve. What I was looking for (i.e. the reason for the post) was primarily some more impact in that area, along with a slightly flatter behavior in the 40-60Hz range without penalizing the image in my listening environment which is almost near-field. To tell it in other words, there is no evident malfunctioning in my speakers.

My comment was on polarity rather than on phase alignment among the two speakers. Without a phase alignment between the speakers not only bass is canceled, but also there is no way to generate any focused image. Well, my experience (to be double checked like I said) was that even polarity had a role on the sound you get. Perhaps YMMV.

Thanks ciao, Vincenzo

[fedeleluigi]

 

On ‎16‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 6:46 PM, vmulone said:

Luigi, perhaps I wasn't too much clear in my posts.

I can clearly feel the tight and good bass of my AR-7's even down to 40Hz, of course with some level decrease reasonably in agreement with their FR response curve. What I was looking for (i.e. the reason for the post) was primarily some more impact in that area, along with a slightly flatter behavior in the 40-60Hz range without penalizing the image in my listening environment which is almost near-field. To tell it in other words, there is no evident malfunctioning in my speakers.

My comment was on polarity rather than on phase alignment among the two speakers. Without a phase alignment between the speakers not only bass is canceled, but also there is no way to generate any focused image. Well, my experience (to be double checked like I said) was that even polarity had a role on the sound you get. Perhaps YMMV.

Thanks ciao, Vincenzo

I was not talking about loudspeakers not in phase. The tweeters could be in phase and the woofers could not because inside only one speaker wires could be connected wrongly. Did you check it? 

[vmulone]

1 minute ago, fedeleluigi said:

 

I was not talking about loudspeakers not in phase.  The tweeters could be in phase and the woofers not. Did you check it? 

Luigi, I'm sure the woofers are in phase as I checked the polarities individually with the battery. Regarding the tweeters, I checked that a monoaural image was perfectly focused in the middle of the soundstage, so I would tell they are in phase too. It should be ok I guess.

Thanks ciao Vincenzo

[fedeleluigi]

23 hours ago, vmulone said:

Luigi, I'm sure the woofers are in phase as I checked the polarities individually with the battery. Regarding the tweeters, I checked that a monoaural image was perfectly focused in the middle of the soundstage, so I would tell they are in phase too. It should be ok I guess.

Thanks ciao Vincenzo

That's OK,

Unfortunately I never listened to AR7s so I can't say anything about their low frequency response in comparison to that of other AR loudspeakers I know.

As i said before, as regards AR18S, in my opinion the bass is very punchy taking into account their little dimensions and especially in comparison to many modern speakers with little woofers even if bass-reflex. So if you can, I suggest that you listen to them. You could like them!

 

Luigi

[Rich W]

Hi Vincenzo,

The AR-18s is a later incarnation of the AR-7, with identical cabinet sizes and from a functional standpoint,  virtually identical woofers.  So you wouldn't be gaining any low frequency performance over your 7's.

From your description of your mono source imaging test, I'm certain there are no phasing issues.  In fact, the tweeter in the AR-7 is intentionally wired out of phase with the woofer, part of the crossover design.  

It sounds like your room dimensions, along with your listening position is causing the deficiency you hear in the 40 to 60 hz range.  While a graphic equalizer can be of corrective assistance, I would hesitate to add more than a 3dB boost, which is very modest and may not compensate enough to satisfy you.

Since you want to build on what you already have (that superb sound stage and lifelike quality), I think Michiganpat's recommendation to add a subwoofer makes the most sense.  You can then vary the placement to get that extra boost you need.  Remember that low bass is non-directional, so the sub doesn't even need to be near your 7's.  Just play with its position until the balances seem right.  Also, make sure you use a low crossover frequency to ensure you don't cause problems with your mid-bass response (100 - 200 hz). That's the foundation of the good sound you're getting now.

Rich W

 

[Aadams]

Vincenzo

This is  from a thread started by SteveF in 2012

"This was reported in Stereo Review magazine--

Many years back (1973 or so), a well-respected audio designer took 2 pairs of AR-7's (2 spkrs per channel) and angled them so as to closely approximate the radiation pattern of the LST. He then equalized the 7's so their far-field response was as close to the LST's as he could get it (within their LF frequency limit).

He then played material that didn't have significant bass below 50-60 Hz and A-B'd the LSTs against the paired 7's.

They were almost indistinguishable, leading this individual to conclude that FR and spectral balance is the primary determinant of a speaker's identifiable sound quality. This experiment presents a very compelling case for that viewpoint.

Aadams' post lends independent credibility to that stance.

Lot's of us like to think that other, more "subtle" and "esoteric" traits are what make speakers sound radically different from each other, but it may just be that good 'ol FR is the BIG ONE. Not the only one, but the big one."  

You might need a 10 band equalizer and a sub-woofer but you are almost halfway to a handy man LST.

Steve F.

[Rich W]

15 hours ago, Aadams said:

Vincenzo

This is  from a thread started by SteveF in 2012

"This was reported in Stereo Review magazine--

Many years back (1973 or so), a well-respected audio designer took 2 pairs of AR-7's (2 spkrs per channel) and angled them so as to closely approximate the radiation pattern of the LST. He then equalized the 7's so their far-field response was as close to the LST's as he could get it (within their LF frequency limit).

He then played material that didn't have significant bass below 50-60 Hz and A-B'd the LSTs against the paired 7's.

They were almost indistinguishable, leading this individual to conclude that FR and spectral balance is the primary determinant of a speaker's identifiable sound quality. This experiment presents a very compelling case for that viewpoint.

Aadams' post lends independent credibility to that stance.

Lot's of us like to think that other, more "subtle" and "esoteric" traits are what make speakers sound radically different from each other, but it may just be that good 'ol FR is the BIG ONE. Not the only one, but the big one."  

You might need a 10 band equalizer and a sub-woofer but you are almost halfway to a handy man LST.

Steve F.

Another incredible testament to the AR-7.  

I've attached two relevant documents. The first is Julian Hirsch's review from the March 1973 issue of Stereo Review (I'm not certain if its appeared in this forum). It underscores Steve F's post re: AR-7 vs. AR-LST.

The second is a free-field frequency response curve from my own primary listening room.  Note the incredibly uniform response, +/- 5dB from 38 hz to 7.5k hz.  This curve is smoother than an earlier one I posted several years back, owing to some crossover modifications I made which I will be posting about soon.

All this talk about the AR-7 has made me place them back in rotation in my main listening room.  They are truly my "desert island" speakers, notwithstanding the rest of my AR collection.

Rich W

AR-7 JHirsch review.pdf

[vmulone]

18 hours ago, Aadams said:

Vincenzo

This is  from a thread started by SteveF in 2012

"This was reported in Stereo Review magazine--

Many years back (1973 or so), a well-respected audio designer took 2 pairs of AR-7's (2 spkrs per channel) and angled them so as to closely approximate the radiation pattern of the LST. He then equalized the 7's so their far-field response was as close to the LST's as he could get it (within their LF frequency limit).

He then played material that didn't have significant bass below 50-60 Hz and A-B'd the LSTs against the paired 7's.

They were almost indistinguishable, leading this individual to conclude that FR and spectral balance is the primary determinant of a speaker's identifiable sound quality. This experiment presents a very compelling case for that viewpoint.

Aadams' post lends independent credibility to that stance.

Lot's of us like to think that other, more "subtle" and "esoteric" traits are what make speakers sound radically different from each other, but it may just be that good 'ol FR is the BIG ONE. Not the only one, but the big one."  

You might need a 10 band equalizer and a sub-woofer but you are almost halfway to a handy man LST.

Steve F.

Dear Aadams, thanks for reporting the SteveF thread.

It's very interesting what you mention, that equalizers may help to a point that apparently different speakers may behave similarly. Also, I tend to listen quite a bit music from the laptop through foobar which has a graphic equalizer, and perhaps this is a great and cheap way to play a little bit with it. I'm not familiar with the equalizer at all, but perhaps it may help a little bit to improve the system room interaction. I hope that system dynamics is not affected, but of course this requires some experiments first.

Regarding the AR-7 doubling towards LST, this seems a fascinating option: perhaps I may consider it whenever we move to a larger apartment. I was wondering whether conclusions may be considered or not similar to what you get stacking two AR-7 pairs (seems not actually....), that seemed to give non optimal results as I read in some previous posts.

Thanks! Best regards, Vincenzo

[vmulone]

2 hours ago, Rich W said:

Another incredible testament to the AR-7.  

I've attached two relevant documents. The first is Julian Hirsch's review from the March 1973 issue of Stereo Review (I'm not certain if its appeared in this forum). It underscores Steve F's post re: AR-7 vs. AR-LST.

The second is a free-field frequency response curve from my own primary listening room.  Note the incredibly uniform response, +/- 5dB from 38 hz to 7.5k hz.  This curve is smoother than an earlier one I posted several years back, owing to some crossover modifications I made which I will be posting about soon.

All this talk about the AR-7 has made me place them back in rotation in my main listening room.  They are truly my "desert island" speakers, notwithstanding the rest of my AR collection.

Rich W

AR-7 JHirsch review.pdf

Rich, I'm excited! This response seems much better than the one you posted some days ago, and I'm curious to understand if you got it with the equalizer and if the modifications you've done affected the bass response.

Thanks! Best regards, Vincenzo

[Rich W]

22 hours ago, vmulone said:

Rich, I'm excited! This response seems much better than the one you posted some days ago, and I'm curious to understand if you got it with the equalizer and if the modifications you've done affected the bass response.

Thanks! Best regards, Vincenzo

Hi Vincenzo,

Believe it or not, that second curve has no equalization whatsoever.

You'll notice that my previous curve, (which has the superimposed response of the 3a) has a broad crest in the lower midrange and a peak at 1.6k.  My 31-band equalizer can easily correct this, with the resulting response as flat as my most recent curve.

However, I was wondering whether more could be done to improve the frequency response curve without resorting to equalization. The broad crest is ubiquitous with all AR 8" models since the inception of the AR-4, the so called "house curve ".  The peak at 1.6k seemed more out of character with the AR philosophy of flat response in real world listening situations.  I don't know if this deviation is specific to the AR-7 design itself,  or the  result of aging drivers.  

I will be posting a detailed post with my solution to further flatten the response of the AR-7.  Basically, it involves upgrading the AR -7 crossover to an amalgam of 1st and 2nd generation AR-6 crossovers.

These modifications have no effect on bass response.  Any minor differences you see are the result of my positioning the speakers slightly closer to the room boundaries.  After 23 years, I'm still making refinements to get the best listening experience in this room!

Rich W

[Aadams]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 10:32 AM, vmulone said:

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 10:32 AM, vmulone said:

Dear Aadams, thanks for reporting the SteveF thread.

It's very interesting what you mention, that equalizers may help to a point that apparently different speakers may behave similarly. Also, I tend to listen quite a bit music from the laptop through foobar which has a graphic equalizer, and perhaps this is a great and cheap way to play a little bit with it. I'm not familiar with the equalizer at all, but perhaps it may help a little bit to improve the system room interaction. I hope that system dynamics is not affected, but of course this requires some experiments first.

Regarding the AR-7 doubling towards LST, this seems a fascinating option: perhaps I may consider it whenever we move to a larger apartment. I was wondering whether conclusions may be considered or not similar to what you get stacking two AR-7 pairs (seems not actually....), that seemed to give non optimal results as I read in some previous post.

Thanks! Best regards, Vincenzo

Vincenzo

Foobar has a 31 band 1/3 octave equalizer, which should be more than adequate.  The configuration of the AR7 in the test was NOT stacked rather angled pairs like two of the 3 faces of an LST.  Now all you need is a powered bass module as suggested earlier.

Adams