|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.216.2.59
Yes posted this in the Speaker area, but thought maybe a few folks in Vintage might enjoy who don't normally get over there.
As the proud owner of a pair of '64 AR 3's, and '74 AR 3a's without enough real estate to set them up in separate systems, I decided to stack them. I'd read positive comments by some AR gurus over at the AR Forums/Classic Speaker Pages so I thought what the hell it's worth a try. The recommendation over there was to stack them horizontally, woofers on the outside, rather then the traditional vertical method. Well, they were right. Amazing, powerful sound that has left me giddy. And they look pretty cool in this arrangement too.
Driving them with a McIntosh 4100 which can play 3 pairs of speakers simultaneously and drive loads down to 2 ohms. It hardly breaks a sweat.
Follow Ups:
Yes horizon is the way on these. Is that wood on wood? The top one could relocate if it is.
ET
"If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking till you do suck seed" - Curly Howard 1936
Top speakers are wood(speaker) on wood(speaker) on wood(stands) on wood(floor). A lotta wood, huh?
Relocate?
Well I was only being concerned that the top speaker could vibrate its way off at higher volume.
You could strap them together or put something like deflex of Herbie's black dots between the two.
ET
"If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking till you do suck seed" - Curly Howard 1936
Nah the top speaker is roughly 60 lbs. Not going anywhere, especially at the volumes that I play.
Gotcha. Not that I took you for a loud rap guy.......
ET
"If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking till you do suck seed" - Curly Howard 1936
in that you are creating a fairly large distance between the midrange drivers if you take the vertical approach.
I do, however, find that MTM speakers provide a less distant perspective of realistic image height.
Given the layout of the domes on the ARs horizontal makes more sense than vertical mounting.
In the 1st issue of TAS, Harry Pearson tested double Advents and loved them calling them a big advance over singles. But interference affects between upper frequency drivers can cause dips and peaks and doubling can change the bass/upper frequency balance. I recall testing double Advents against IMF Studio speakers. Then we tried single Advents and the singles had better focus and detail. Stacking needs to be done carefully.
This is a good post from Tom Tyson, an AR guru over at the Classic Speaker Pages on the subject of stacking AR speakers. Sent me on my journey.
Interesting that Tyson recommends a vertical stack with woofers at the top and bottom (upper pair inverted).
In the mid-'70s I had Double Advents as recommended in TAS. I tried both side by side and vertical, but never horizontal stacking. I preferred vertical with the top pair inverted, just as Tyson suggests for the AR-3s.
"The piano ain't got no wrong notes." Thelonious Monk
Here's his reaction on horizontal stacking
Edits: 11/03/16
Those are a triple AR3a with a single woofer.I have three pair of AR3s and one pair of AR3a.As fantastic as they are,I have never tried to stack them.
What I will do it,put the Janszen 130s on top and then put the Realistic electrostat 3s on top of that..You disconnect the mids and tweeters when you it and it is one incredible sounding speaker.I have actually use the I-130s which are the straight box version of the one in the middle.The 130 you see in the middle belongs to my friend Bob in Colorado.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong" H. L. Mencken
Edits: 11/03/16
Wow. That must sound amazing.
There's a guy over at the Classic Speaker Pages that runs stacked LST's with (I believe) a couple of the big Phase Linear amps. And he listens loudly evidently. He also lives alone way out in the country. There are always trade offs.
When Mark Levinson ran Cello he included a speaker, the Amati, in his line up which looked like a copy of the AR LST. So that seemed either a high complement or a bit of plagiarizing.I only heard a pair of LSTs once, and while they sounded good, I felt they may have been underpowered. Never did hear the AR-9 but was curious about them.
Edit - correcting spell check correction!
"The piano ain't got no wrong notes." Thelonious Monk
Edits: 11/05/16
To set the record straight, Mark Levinson obtained permission or "rights" from AR to build and market an LST inspired speaker called the Amati.
Thanks Dave, I never read that before.
"The piano ain't got no wrong notes." Thelonious Monk
I don't recall seeing that in print either but I have seen comments about Cello and the LST with a different name so I thought I should make that fact known in case there are people that think Mark somehow got away with an LST knockoff without AR approval.
I said they were LST inspired because the woofers and tweeters were not the same as found in the AR LST or AR3A, there was no autoformer with a aural balance switch and the four mids and tweeters were wired in parallel instead of series parallel.
The Cello Performance amps were quite capable of handling that load because they were designed with that in mind.
The later Amati had Dynaudio drivers in them.
ML/ Cello used modified AR dome drivers. The midrange was used without the protective grille and diffractive felt. The Amati had specific installation requirements, thus did not need the autoformer to accommodate mounting in several wall/boundary locations.
The details are buried in the archives of the classicspeakerpages.net AR forum.
Best,
Ross
You must be referring to the later Amati with the Dynaudio drivers because the Amati with the mids from AR did have the metal grilles and foam.
As for the autoformer, Mark just didn't want an autoformer in the signal path.
Being that the woofer and tweeters were not the same as in the original AR LST, the balance was automatically different.
But as for placement,the full blown Cello System was stacked Amati or two per channel mounted on granite stands and they were most often than not set up away from a back wall but the decision not to use an autoformer was made before any were even built.
The you had the KLH 28.
They sound incredible when I have them both setup.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong" H. L. Mencken
The AR1W woofer only and Janszen electrostatic were a high end solution in the 60s. In fact when KLH, an off shoot of AR in a way began, it's first speakers were woofers made to work with Janszens.
You speak of the KLH Model One. Very few of those birds made. I've never seen one. Was super expensive to make and one of the reasons why the Model Six came along in '58.Here's a 1970 AR ad describing how Harvard Medical School purchases and set up 8 AR 1x(AR 1 with a Ar 4x tweeter) speakers, stacked 4 each in opposite corners of the room with one AR amp!:
Edits: 11/03/16
I have a pair of Model Ones with the Janszen tweeters. The latter are in
the queue for repairs, but the woofers are thunderous. Stacking in this
case is side-by-side :-)
Wow..I'd love to hear a pair of those.
120 db, effortlessly and clearly.
Here's the restoration thread over on AK:
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: