AR3A vs AR2ax

ssmith3046

Super Member
I have a pair of really nice AR2ax speakers but have never been able to get into their sound. To my ears they're very neutral but just don't sound very open or have a very dynamic soundstage like my KLH Model 5's do. I have driven them with a Marantz 2265, Yamaha 1020, Marantz 2250, and Fisher 500C. I have a line on a pair of restored AR3a's but the tech who is selling them lives out of sate so I can't listen to them. I'm just wondering if I don't care that much for the AR2ax speakers would I like the AR3a speakers?
 
were your 2ax's recapped and Lpad refurbished?

anyways, the 3a's are definitely more capable speakers than the 2ax's. deeper bass and overall wider coverage. 3a is a lot bigger too. i'd definitely go get them.
 
I own and love both. The 3As go deeper in the bass and have several other small improvements, but if you dislike the overall sound of your 2AXs, you won't be impressed with the 3As. The difference in sound quality is subtle not transformational.

Ray
 
The KLH model 5s you have competed with the AR-3a and were voiced brighter than the ARs. If you like the sound of the 5s and not the 2ax, the 3a likely won't do it for you.
 
The KLH model 5s you have competed with the AR-3a and were voiced brighter than the ARs. If you like the sound of the 5s and not the 2ax, the 3a likely won't do it for you.

I also doubt you'll like the AR-3a if you didn't like the 2ax. After having said that though... the AR-3a is in an entirely different league from the 2ax in sound quality and I've owned multiple pairs of each. The 2ax is a very laid back nice to listen to speaker whereas the AR-3a is too as well as far more dynamic, detailed, and artful. To my ears, the differences are not small.
 
I agree the Ar2Ax's are laid back- the 3a's are noticably more robust sounding. Given the choice of the two I would go with the 3a's over the 2Ax's.
DC
 
The AR3a has a more wide open midrange and extended bass response, but if you don't care for the sound of the 2ax chances are that you won't care for the 3a either.
 
Hi

I agree with the above.

I have a pair of AR11(C), the replacements for the AR3A and I love them! By far the best speakers I have ever owned. I also have a nice pair od AR2AX and 2 pair of Dynaco A25's which are very warm and musical but limited on extreme lows.

I find the AR2AX very neutral but very clear on the bass end, a little thin on the midrange with the L-Pads at 75% volume. Good quality but not quite warm enough on some music, very good on Jazz and classical music. Not so great on Pop music.

On the AR3's be careful buying them, be sure that they don't need a lot of work on the mid and high controls or crossover cap's. This can get expensive to bring up to spec!
 
The AR3a speakers I'm thinking about have been totally restored. I always thought that my AR2ax speaker were great for jazz.
 
I'd get them having enjoyed my new 3a in a not restored state last night. They did wonders with jazz too. Very realistic live sound. Surprisingly revealing too.
 
whether you liked the 2ax's or not, 3a is definitely worth getting. i was into AR all along, but when i first heard the 3a properly restored, i was shocked at how good they sounded.
 
I agree. The 2ax is laid back.
But seem to really open up nicely when powered by large-ish "high current" amplification..they sound like crud with tubes.
 
Great feedback and thanks. I decided not to buy the AR3a speakers. I really enjoy my KLH Model 5's and they sound fantastic with my old Fisher 500C. They just fill the whole room with music and the speakers disappear. Maybe one day I'll buy a pair of AR3a speakers but not today.
 
Most of the "fully restored" AR3a speakers have had an asking price that was way too high for me. I really like the AR2ax for classical and jazz. I have a nice pair of AR11s that I've played with a 30 watt tube amp. They sounded very good but I need to hook them up to my 300watt power amp.
If you really like your 5s forget speaker shopping and just listen:thmbsp:
 
Back
Top Bottom