Jump to content
The Classic Speaker Pages Discussion Forums

simark

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About simark

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Toronto, Canada
  1. Hello to all; Its been a while since I last posted. Since then, with the tremendous assistance from Roy C., I modified my AR-3's into a pair of AR-3a Limiteds. All NOS tweeters and midranges. All the cross-overs were completely rebuilt and new pots were installed. Cost more than I wanted to originally spend, but I figured this is the very last kick at the can. All I can say is I am really glad I went this way. Wow! If this is close to what they originally sounded like, then all I can say is that a new pair of AR-3a speakers could still blow you away in any showroom. I never thought that I would see the day when I would be turning down the pots on a set of AR speakers. The highs and mids are very prominent when the pots are maxed out. I know that they will mellow out after a few hundred hours but what a kick! Thanks to all the experts out there that contribute to these pages. Gave me the confidence to dive in a transform these old girls into a pair of red-hot Mamas. (bet you've never heard of AR-3's described as Red-Hot Mama's before). Stan BTW: I'm now the owner of a extra pair of AR-3 tweeters (working) and one dead tweeter, one dead midrange and one good midrange (Tonegen replacement driver). Plus AR-3 cross-over parts.
  2. Hi Roy Thanks for your reply. I certain was going to buy the HiVi tweeter and perhaps take you up on your offer for the midranges, but I made a decision to spring for original AR drivers one last time. Next time, substitutions!! I bought (for more than I wanted to spend) NOS AR tweeters and midranges from the Canadian Audio classifieds site. They look brand new and from reading the restoring document look like original parts dating from the 70's. My woofer in the AR3 has a serial number 1-2100030B which indicates that the speaker was updated to a AR3a woofer but retained the AR3 midranges and tweeters as well as the AR3 label on the back. So it looks like I will be upgrading the AR3 to a AR3a. Do I have to change out the crossover also or can I use the original AR3 crossover? Mine does not have the additional 6uF cap, but does have replacement L-pads. I may still bypass the L-pads. Here is a photo of what I purchased. I was actually looking forward to messing around with the new tweeters etc, but a little voice inside of me said to do the right thing. Soon, I certainly will be picking your brain for more advice once I start this project if that is alright. Regards, Stan Tweeters_and_Midranges.bmp
  3. simark

    quadaptor!

    Hello If it's retro you want, it's retro I've got. I have a Realistic SQ-II Quadraphonic adapter for you. It also did a respectable job of simulating surround audio. Almost mint.
  4. Hello I have an AR-3 speaker with the tweeter and midrange both dead. 0.0 DCR when I disconnected the yellow centre wire of the terminal strip and measured both drivers. I don't know how this happened, bad luck, stupidity or a combination of both. I have read in these forums that the HI-VI QR-1 tweeter is a plausible replacement for the AR-3a tweeter. Is this also true for the AR-3? Is there a suitable substitute for the midrange? I am asking this because replacing both the tweeter and midrange with original drivers plus shipping to Canada is going to cost upwards to near $200, which is more than I am willing to spend on one speaker for 50 year old drivers. I understand that I will have to modify both speakers, but if the numbers are right, and the sound is somewhat close to the original, (I am not too concerned about the dispersion) then I think it is worth a go. Am I a monster? Stan
  5. WOW! Fantastic work! A lot can be applied to the AR-3 I'm sure. Thanks for all the hard work!
  6. Hello guys; A few weeks back I posted that I was going to seal the surrounds of my AR-4's. I did it with thinned down latex sealer and some black acrylic paint. Like I reported, the difference was significant. Since then I bought some of the Global WD Dampener Adhesive and proceeded to reseal the cloth surroundson my AR -2ax and AR-3's. Thinned with some water and another drop of black paint I can't say if the resonances were changed because I don't own a generator, but I notice that the bass has improved with the AR-3's. I really can't detect any changes to the AR-2ax's but I had to recap all the x-overs anyways (cap values had increased X4 in some cases) and I also tore apart and cleaned out all the pots. The Global WD solution may be PVA, but it sure didn't smell like any PVA that I've ever used. I telephoned the company and spoke to Rhett Molitor, I think he is the manager there. He assured me that this formulation was developed not to dry or stiffen over time. I put a fairly thin coat on so I'm crossing my fingers hoping that I didn't change the Fs too much. Global does have a Black Nitrile adhesive BC series. According to their site http://www.globaladhesives.net/surround_adhesives.htm "These nitrile rubber cements are designed to bond cloth and foam surrounds to the frame and cone. They are also excellent for bonding gasket and spider to frame." I wonder if this would be another suitable sealer for the surrounds?
  7. > I am trying to >>minimise the amount of solvent based stuff I use, so I'll >live >>with the waterbase solution and I'll let some one else try >the >>Butyl rubber. > >I'm referring to a solvent as the stuff in which a solute is >dissolved. For your solution, latex is the solute, water is >the solvent, sorry but that is why the advertisement was >meaningless--all these sealers are "solvent based." >One certainly wants to let materials with organic solvents dry >where we will not breathe their vapors! > >Cheers, Yes that is what I meant, sorry about the incorrect terminology. The last time I popped off the lid to a non-waterbased coating (airplane dope for model RC airplanes) the smell didn't leave the house for days. Nearly turned my hair green. I could have waited for good weather outside, but with the constant rain we have been having, and the colder weather coming, it's just easier to use water base. Stan
  8. >>http://www.globaladhesives.net/surround_adhesives.htm >> > >One product that might prove useful is their DG-8. However, >the text is poorly written. It says "solvent based." > All elastomers are dissolved in a solvent. so that phrase >tells us nothing. Perhaps we should ask for its MSDS sheet. >If it turns out to be butyl rubber, it may be a replacement >for "butyl rubber sealant," that is no longer >manufactured by Loctite. Then one would thin it to the >consistency of water and apply it very sparingly and on only >where light is visible through the surround. Hello I just talked to the supplier and he informed me that the DG-8 is formulated for bonding the dust cap to the centre of the cone, thus is sets up stiffer than the WD-8 or the BC-8. He suggested that the BC-8 might be very close to what we are looking for and has the advantage of curing tack free and very flexible. He will be sending me the MSDS of both the WD and the BC formulations and I will post them when I get them. Stan
  9. OOPs already ordered a bottle of the waterbase stuff. Price was right though. Since a have a very young child in the house I am trying to minimise the amount of solvent based stuff I use, so I'll live with the waterbase solution and I'll let some one else try the Butyl rubber. But I'll let the group know how it turns out. I might even test the fs before and after if I get ambitious. Stan
  10. Gents, thanks for all your suggestions and advice. I am going to try this product as it seems to be made for speakers. http://www.globaladhesives.net/surround_adhesives.htm When I get it I'll try it on a piece of cloth first to see how flexible it is after it dries. Stan
  11. Hello That makes sense, but I have no way to measure the free air resonance. But when I reassembled everything and sealed it up the difference was astonishing. Well worth the excercise. Really chuffed. I'm on a roll now so I'm going to open up my AR-3's, AR-2ax's and for good measure, my Dynaco A25's. I look for the surround sealer though. Stan
  12. OK, I took some water base bathroom sealer (Mono) and thinned it down with a bit of water and black acrylic craft paint. I tried Carl's suggestion of spinning it on a lazy susan but it wasn't working too well, so I just painted it free hand. It took two thin coats but there are no more fishnet holes. At a distance it kind of looks like new foam surrounds! It feels very pliable and a touch stiffer than previous, so I think that at least they are closer to factory condition than before. So chuffed. Now to close it up so my boy can listen to Barney again.
  13. Gentlemen: I am currently working on my AR-4x speakers, I rebuilt the pots, recapped the x-over etc. I noticed that the sealing of the woofers was a bit thin, I can see through the old sealing like a pair of fishnet stockings. (see photos) I have heard people thinning latex caulking with water and painting it on to seal the cloth or thinning Weldbond and painting it on. My question is, what is the recommended way to seal the surrounds and have any of you had any experience with any of the methods I mentioned- (or do you have a better way)? I don't want to change the surround as they are still intact and seems to be sound, except for the fishnet effect. Stan
  14. Well gentlemen I received the tweeter from Larry at AR-Vintage - (Thank you very much Larry) - and started installation it right away. As I was in process, I was checking the continuity between the yellow and black wires to make sure I was getting some sort of reading. Lo and behold, zilch. I checked the two aluminum wire crimps and they looked good. Just to make I remelted the solder joints on the tabs on the front and rechecked. I had a signal, so I went back and tested the old tweeter. Still 0.012 ohms, but curiously, that is what the new tweeter rang up. So, long story short, if I had touched up my solder joints I might have avoided replacing the tweeter. Then again, i learned a heck of alot about these speakers and have gained a little more appreciation for them. Anyways, thanks guys for all the help and suggestions. Now if I could only get the pots in my AR-4x's to work... Stan
  15. >>I ordered a tweeter from Larry at AR-Vintage. > >Stan: > >You will receive an AB-Tech tweeter. Ken Kantor has been >taking some measurements on this driver, and in a few days >will be posting a suggested crossover change to make it sound >much like the original. > I sent an e-mail to Larry asking if I am receiving a replacement AB-Tech tweeter or an actual 40 year old AR-3 tweeter, but let's assume will I receive the AB-tech. Should I replace just the blown tweeter and leave the good one, or should I replace both and become a heathen? The other tweeter seems to be perfectly fine and happy where it is. Considering that the x-over capacitors have most likely drifted and the level pots are set where there are no drop outs, the speakers won't put out identical outputs anyways. What is your opinion about this? >>I was wondering >>how do you join the tweeter leads to the termminals or >splice >>the leads together. I've tried solder, but this did not >work. >>Right now one of the leads is barely making contact, if I >>breathe on it, it goes intermittent. > >Your speaker has front-wired connections. The replacement will >have back-wired push-connector tabs. You will need to drill or >cut out a bit of the backbore rabbet in order to make room for >each of the two tabs. 0.187" StayCon female connectors >can be crimped to the ends of new wires coming from the X-O >board to the tweeter tabs. The yellow and green wires must >remain connected to the front three-wire terminal strip as >they supply signal to the mid- you can leave the black wire >also; it will no longer connect to anything once the old >tweeter is removed. > >If you replace your damaged tweeter with a viable original >front-wired tweeter, you will need to splice its thin aluminum >wires to copper wires. Several suggestions- including wrapping >and dabbing with silver ink and crimping Al and Cu wires >inside a small hollow push pin from a multipin connector have >been made, but that does not look like your problem. > >Looks like you have removed the potentiometers and replace >them with L-Pads? If so, remember this size L-pad is rated at >15 W, whereas the original pots were rated at 25 W. > >Cheers, >
×
×
  • Create New...