Jump to content
The Classic Speaker Pages Discussion Forums

Steve F

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Steve F

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

12,922 profile views
  1. This is a much better article, far more relevant, IIDSSM. https://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/most-influential-speakers
  2. I subscribe to Stereophile and have for decades. Although the $25,000 speaker and $30,000 amp reviews are indeed irrelevant, they do, in fact, review 'normal-priced' equipment every month. As a matter of fact, normal-priced reviews outnumber the esoteric stuff. In this issue, they review a $500 pair of JBL floorstanders. Can't get more down-to-earth than that. The thing I like about the magazine is that their instrumented printed measurements and graphs of speakers under review are quite good. They show a FR in a 30˚ window of on-tweeter axis (a very useful, relevant measurement), they show port contribution, they show room response, step response, all kinds of very solid info. Editorial like Dudley's is inane, but like any magazine or paper or on-line pub, you, as the reader, are free to simply pick and choose what you want to read and what you find interesting. Dudley gets so much wrong about acoustic suspension that it's not even worth my time to list it all and rebut it. But the instrumented tests of normal-priced loudspeakers are great and it's the only audio mag I subscribe to.
  3. Steve F

    OLA's I Just Bought

    "Lots of people tell me they got rid of their vintage gear and bought a little Bose system that "sounds just as good." Then I invite them to listen to their favorite music through my AR=91s and they're left speechless 😁" We had a friend and his wife over from out of state. She's a classical concert pianist and teacher. My friend and I were listening to jazz trio recording in my 1st floor "music room." The French doors were closed, but you could still hear in the rest of the house. My wife and his wife were in the kitchen, talking. All of a sudden, the door bursts open. It's my friend's wife. "Where is that piano? Who's playing? What......?" AR9's, powered by 400 distortion-free Parasound 2250 watts per side. Me, smiling. JKent is about, oh, 100% correct. People just don't know how absolutely stunning truly great audio is. Stunning. Jaw-dropping.
  4. "I know that in 1969 speakers were not always sold as matched pairs, and that stereophonic sound was not widespread yet. So often people just bought one for their current mono system, and bought a second one later when they upgraded to stereo." This is incorrect. Stereo was introduced in 1958 and was an immediate success. Part of the reason that AR had such market dominance in the mid-60's (over a 30% market share in 1965) is that with AR speakers, a listener could easily fit two compact speakers into a living room and enjoy deeper, better bass than from a single older-design bass-reflex speaker. By 1969, there were virtually no mono systems at all. Everything was 2-channel/2-speaker stereo.
  5. What did Mark Twain say? "Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated." We're certainly glad that's the case here! This is quite the august group, without question. The amount of collective technical, historical and anecdotal knowledge about AR is extraordinary, in my view. And quite unlike most other social platforms, even when there is the rare disagreement, they're generally handled in a most agreeable fashion, with no bridges being permanently burned. I've been here for 17 years and have enjoyed every minute. If I live another 17 years, I plan on continuing to visit every day.
  6. When I was at Atlantic Technology for around 10 years starting in 2003, we used Bravox cone drivers in our TOTL 6200 and 8200 speakers, both of which were THX-certified (during the days when THX cert really meant something, in terms of stringent FR, THD, max SPL, etc. requirements). They were great drivers, really uniform and refined. We used 12", 10, 8, 6 1/2 and 5 1/4. BTW, the TSW-410 got a great review from High Fidelity magazine in 1989, I believe. I'm sure I have that edition in my stash. I'll dig it out and post it. Steve F.
  7. DavidR, that's actually good to know. If I ever decide to replace or retire my 9's, I will contact you. I'm in Foxboro (as in "Home of the World Champion New England Patriots"). You may kid around about "haul away free of charge," but they would be. I wouldn't want money for them. They've given me so much enjoyment for so long that just the knowledge that they're going to a good home, so to speak, would be more than enough. It ain't happenin' too soon, however, so I wouldn't be holding my breath if I were you. Steve F.
  8. Aadams' tale of Villchur's humor is interesting. When I worked at Boston Acoustics, I wrote all the owner's manuals, training guides, magazine ads, etc for my products. One of them was the Recepter radio, a really good AM/FM mono table-top radio that sold for $159.00 (around 2001 or 2, if I recall). When we did the manuals, before we sent them out to print, we'd pass the draft around to people to see if they made sense. I put a "hook" in the Recepter's draft, to see if people were really reading it. For the FM antenna, I wrote something like, "Orient the antenna to the position that delivers the best reception, which is guaranteed by Murphy's Law to be the worst-looking location, like draped over the front of the kitchen counter." Well, BA's president came to my office holding the draft of the manual. I thought I was done for, in big trouble for joking around. "I love this!" he said. So it stayed in the final manual, packed with every product. It even made it into the next product's manual, which was done after I'd left the company. People love humor, if it's done intelligently and tastefully. People are people.
  9. I'm not touchin' 'em. I was just wondering. My feeling is that the AR9 is akin to boxer Muhammad Ali. When young, the untouchable heavyweight champion of the world. No one even close. When old, he was still good enough to knock out George Foreman and and become champion again. Was the 32-year-old Ali of 1974 as good as the 25-year-old Ali of 1967? Maybe not quite, but he was still the best in the world. Those are my 9's: a 32-year-old Muhammad Ali. Steve F.
  10. It posted strangely, for some reason. This is the rest of the post:
  11. The Kortec tweeter should work well in the VR30. There would be no reason to use the AMD on the Kortec, since, as you surmised, it is strictly for removing the resonances of a metal dome. In all the time I was at BA (1992-2003) we never had to replace a single VR tweeter due to burnout. Not one. Ever, from the time of the VR's introduction (fall 1994) until I left in March 2003. Not a single tweeter. VR20, 30, 40, VR950, 960, 970, 965, 975, VR12, 10, VR910, 920, VR-M50, 60, 80, 90, VR-MC, VR surrounds, MR90 sats, MR90 Center, probably a few models I'm forgetting. Not one tweeter. Ever. You (or the previous owner) must have driven the ever-lovin' cr*p out of these things. That tweeter was both bullet-proof and ruler-flat from 2kHz to 20kHz. It put every tweeter from every company I was at to total shame. Steve F.
  12. When I was at BA, our head transducer engineer had previously been at AR and he was one of the lead system engineers for these Classic models. He did a lot of work on the 30. He did say that they were a bear to ship because of the unusual cabinet shape, the way all the panels sloped in and down. A lot of early shipping damage before they got the packaging straightened out. I only heard them briefly, during a tour of the AR plant when it was at 330 Turnpike St in Canton MA, just before they left for CA. They sounded clean and detailed, but I wasn't using my own "test" material and I couldn't form a definite opinion. I always wondered about the low end--with two 10" woofers, did this have 90-like bass? I have reason to doubt it. The AR3 Limited came out in the same timeframe as the Classics and the 3 was a very "audiophile-ish" speaker with a 12" woofer and a MTM array with 3" dome mids and a dome tweeter. It had that off-standing metal screen grill that made it look like an electrostatic speaker. Anyway, true to its early-90's timeframe, the Limited 3 was a 'lean' sounding speaker in the audiophile tradition, not a gutsy, powerful-sounding speaker like the 3a, 11 or 9/90. Can anyone give me a real, accurate assessment of the Classic 30's sound character? Steve F.
  13. That TSW brochure is the very first one. There were others that followed. There was, in fact, a TSW710 with dual 8-in woofers. There was also a TSW brochure where all the speakers model numbers ended in '15,' not '10.' You probably have TSW710's. The TSW x15's were all dual-woofer units--315, 415, etc. Dual 5 1/4", dual 6 1/2", etc. I think the other speaker is one of those. I'll check to see if I can find that x15 brochure and I'll post pics.
  • Create New...