Jump to content
The Classic Speaker Pages Discussion Forums
mister_roboto_hal

AR is making speakers again

Recommended Posts

Oh look- little LSTs. Frank will be... underwhelmed. Looks like they picked these
before they were fully grown :-)

http://www.acoustic-research.com/home-audio/2000-series/?sku=ARSP2S6BK

ARSP2S6BK_1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello dxho, Thanks for the mention and consideration.

But, just looking at these I wonder about diffraction effects with those domes mounted the way they are.

See my last post about another similar attempt.    What's that song?   "Ain't Nothing Like the Real Thing"

FM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, I'm surprised at you.

These are made for some devout AR owners.

You know the ones who believe they must keep their tone controls set on flat and that muffled sound is the way it has to be.

The ones that believe a $200. cartridge sounds as good as a $2,000. cartridge. The ones who disregard 'head-room' because they don't know the wonderful world of really high-powered amplifiers. The ones who omit correct room placement of speakers because they're in denial about such facts and feel they know better regardless. The ones who insist that CD's are better than a clean high quality recorded vinyl disk. Or the stalwarts who believe the 'old wet blanket' sort of sound is the way it's all supposed to sound like. Or the ones who believe that better quality interconnects don't make a difference. And, the ones that feel a $78. turn table's tone arm can compete with more costly ones. And lastly, the ones who won't open their minds to the rest of the audio world and certain improvements that have been made in the last 40+ years.  Or, the ones who won't believe the flood might  come. 

Me?  I'm hanging with Noah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DavidR said:

What ! No Tweeters ?

maybe it's the perspective... the woofers are so small the tweeters look like
classic midranges?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, dxho said:

maybe it's the perspective... the woofers are so small the tweeters look like
classic midranges?

Could be. I thought it had 8 mids and 2 small woofers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, frankmarsi said:

The ones that believe a $200. cartridge sounds as good as a $2,000. cartridge. The ones who disregard 'head-room' because they don't know the wonderful world of really high-powered amplifiers. The ones who omit correct room placement of speakers because they're in denial about such facts and feel they know better regardless. The ones who insist that CD's are better than a clean high quality recorded vinyl disk. Or the stalwarts who believe the 'old wet blanket' sort of sound is the way it's all supposed to sound like. Or the ones who believe that better quality interconnects don't make a difference. And, the ones that feel a $78. turn table's tone arm can compete with more costly ones. And lastly, the ones who won't open their minds to the rest of the audio world and certain improvements that have been made in the last 40+ years.  Or, the ones who won't believe the flood might  come. 

The ones who insist that CD's are better than a clean high quality recorded vinyl disk.

This could go either way. CD and Vinyl originate from the same source, but the end products are delivered through different production paths.  All things being equal the CD will be sonically superior to vinyl, but vinyl could be superior because of differences in quality of workmanship along the respective paths.

Or the ones who believe that better quality interconnects don't make a difference

If you have decent, properly functioning electronics, speakers are the always the highest distortion component in any hi fidelity system.   The distortion in average electronics is around 10 times lower than what AR speakers can deliver so all that matters 10 to 15db of headroom at less than 1% distortion.  Interconnects merely need to efficiently pass enough electricity. There are no special sounding electrons whether from gold, silver or copper.

I will concede the $2000 cartridge is more compliant than the $200 and should track better on wide dynamic passages

I also recognize that expensive interconnects can look cool and important and stylish enough to enhance the ownership experience but sonically, there are double blind tests results that show human ears can’t reliably tell the difference between expensive interconnects and 16 gauge copper.

Can you tell me, when Alfred Brendel depresses the f1 key in B Sonata 23, how it will sound more like a piano if I use a $200 vs $2000 cartridge or special interconnects vs good copper wire or Vinyl vs CD of equal production values?  (Disregarding the inaudible noise floor of the CD)

Adams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The traditional towers are ported though.  Small drivers and high efficiency (90db).  Squeezing that vented enclosure for an F3 of 35hz with 7 inch drivers.  In otherwords, the traditional stuff, to me looks boring.  The sealed stuff I would love to hear.  Its geared around home theater, low bass points, 60ish so subs would be required.  It is also designed only to be wall mounted.  The little surround looks interesting as well.  I would love to hear them - the website provides nothing.   All the subs are ported designs as well.  One has to wonder though how much engineering moxy is behind it.  Or will it be here today gone the next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AR Aficionados,

The largest on-wall has 2 6.5" drivers and 8 1.2" domes in a cabinet 4 inches deep.  There is not much to refract - it aint that big folks.  Wall candy, but would still love to hear them.  Not a single distributor in the states.  Britain and Asia Pacific.  Chinese of course, but so are the common brands people love and have now, Polk, Klipsch, etc.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aadams said:

The ones who insist that CD's are better than a clean high quality recorded vinyl disk.

 

This could go either way. CD and Vinyl originate from the same source, but the end products are delivered through different production paths.  All things being equal the CD will be sonically superior to vinyl, but vinyl could be superior because of differences in quality of workmanship along the respective paths.

 

Or the ones who believe that better quality interconnects don't make a difference

 

If you have decent, properly functioning electronics, speakers are the always the highest distortion component in any hi fidelity system.   The distortion in average electronics is around 10 times lower than what AR speakers can deliver so all that matters 10 to 15db of headroom at less than 1% distortion.  Interconnects merely need to efficiently pass enough electricity. There are no special sounding electrons whether from gold, silver or copper.

I will concede the $2000 cartridge is more compliant than the $200 and should track better on wide dynamic passages

 

I also recognize that expensive interconnects can look cool and important and stylish enough to enhance the ownership experience but sonically, there are double blind tests results that show human ears can’t reliably tell the difference between expensive interconnects and 16 gauge copper.

 

Can you tell me, when Alfred Brendel depresses the f1 key in B Sonata 23, how it will sound more like a piano if I use a $200 vs $2000 cartridge or special interconnects vs good copper wire or Vinyl vs CD of equal production values?  (Disregarding the inaudible noise floor of the CD)

Adams

You are incorrect on both issues so I won’t bother to reply.

Sadly for some, a set-up isn’t of high enough quality so it can’t ‘reveal’ enough quality reproduction to show any differences. Apparently there are certain levels of detail and micro detail that aren’t being realized because of a low resolution set-up.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, frankmarsi said:

And lastly, the ones who won't open their minds to the rest of the audio world and certain improvements that have been made in the last 40+ years.

Wait a minute.

What are these "certain improvements" that you mention? 

Isn't most of your equipment from the '70s?

Would a high-resolution audio file have "levels of detail and micro detail" - would it be a "certain improvement"?

Could you even play a 24/192 file on your system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ar_pro said:

Wait a minute.

What are these "certain improvements" that you mention? 

Isn't most of your equipment from the '70s?

Would a high-resolution audio file have "levels of detail and micro detail" - would it be a "certain improvement"?

Could you even play a 24/192 file on your system?

HI ar_pro, although I love music at almost any cost, computer-files are not my cup of tea. Being somewhat of a traditionalist, especially regarding music playback set-ups, and as such I am a fully immersed devotee of the black-wax medium.

My styli vibrate, then the music goes round and round (oh-oh-oh) then it comes out as even stronger vibrations thru the speakers.

Mostly all musical instruments utilize vibrations and so do my AR transducers, aka, Laboratory Standard Transducers, aka AR-LST.

For me, homogenized or canned sound, or touch-screen push-button sound is for public address systems, sirens and alarms not my musical enjoyment.

I find it odd that a site that harbors and whole-heartedly endorses the use of old and literally very limited life-span antique speakers can be so enthralled with little impressions on a CD or what some one transmits thru a computer site.

In terms of 'certain-improvements'; what was meant was modern MC cartridges, ultrasonic disk cleaning, and newer types of interconnect windings.

Regarding computer files of which I haven't any regard for, I wouldn't get into that world if you paid me. That is reserved for casual listening while viewing on a computer screen.  For many others when seriously listening is done, one must sit down, reading the realistic-sized record jacket for credits and info, intensely listening and being immersed in the music.

Music is made by making vibrations and ends up as vibrations coming out of vibrating speaker cones.

FM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, frankmarsi said:

Music is made by making vibrations and ends up as vibrations coming out of vibrating speaker cones.

FM

Not how I make music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I like records too; there's a certain romance about them, but your dismissal of hi-res digital music is simplistic, and without any noticeable basis in fact. You've got a preference, sure, but your argument in favor of LPs isn't enhanced by deriding the competition, especially when apparently the only "certain improvements" over the past 50 years come down to methods for de-crudifying the grooves in a vinyl record and techniques for winding wire on a bobbin. 

And to you other point, the beauty of fiddling with antique loudspeakers is that they can still be relevant - that is, with modern equipment & sources, they can sound even better than they did in their day. There's no logical disjunction at work, here - "there's a million ways to get things done" (David Byrne, 1981)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, frankmarsi said:

Regarding computer files of which I haven't any regard for, I wouldn't get into that world if you paid me. That is reserved for casual listening while viewing on a computer screen.  For many others when seriously listening is done, one must sit down, reading the realistic-sized record jacket for credits and info, intensely listening and being immersed in the music.

 

4 hours ago, frankmarsi said:

You are incorrect on both issues so I won’t bother to reply.

Sadly for some, a set-up isn’t of high enough quality so it can’t ‘reveal’ enough quality reproduction to show any differences. Apparently there are certain levels of detail and micro detail that aren’t being realized because of a low resolution set-up.

You have become exceptionally good at answering questions without answering the questions.  I am beginning to think frankmarsi is merely a username and you were really a spin meister strategist for a Manhattan PR firm. Or, you just a have a lot of time to think in circles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vinyl, CD's, SACD, DVD-A, DTS-MA, Bluray Audio etc. are all at the mercy of the people doing the mastering, engineering and production, and especially marketing.   Consequently, I own excellent, very good, good, fair, poor and lousy sounding specimens in all of the formats.   I have some supposedly high-end SACD's (which have 64 times the resolution of a CD) that should be relegated to woodpecker repellent duty.

I enjoy the generally smooth sound of vinyl but don't mess with it anymore because of the high cost of getting excellent results from the best discs, properly setting up a turntable, the cleaning and de-stat of records.   I also like the sound of tube amps but don't fool with them because of the need to re-bias and tube replacement.  I recall DavidR telling me that his tube amp should be biased once a week.

But to each his own...Enjoy whatever equipment/formats you prefer because the wives think we are all crazy anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×