5 pair of speakers later, I still can't find a replacement for some old A-25's!?!

JohnVF said:
I want to add that I think a lot of new speakers really do earn their reputation for being overly analytical, exaggerated in detail through a non flat response, and generally thin sounding. But they aren't all like that. And when that aren't, like Spendor, they truly can have an amazing sound, similar to vintage but not as boxy sounding. The boxy comment is coming from a guy used to full range ELectrostats and Sony ES speakers shaped like a stealth fighter so administer the obligatory grain of salt :) I thought the Harbeths had a box coloration as well. But nothing like my Ar2ax. I didn't care for those. I hope the 3a is a lot better.
Click to expand...

Not to worry. Your AR-3as are not remotely like AR-2axs in quality of sound. I've owned both types of each speaker... the 2ax with the large orange tweeter and the type with the small black tweeter. Also both types of AR-3as. You have the later ferrite woofers... in my opinion a bit unfortunate since I prefer the alnico woofer, but you might not be of the same opinion. Until you hear both at length, you'll never know. If you are anywhere near Tucson, AZ and want to hear mine, just shoot me a PM. I'll be happy to give you an extensive audition. :thmbsp:
 
I disliked the AR-3a when it was new much less now. I think it's tubby, rolled off, distorted, opaque and dynamically constipated. I'd take Dynacos over them anyday and indeed, back in the day I did.
 
Last edited:
Tom Brennan said:
I disliked the AR-3a when it was new much less now. I think it's tubby, rolled off, distorted, opaque and dynamically constipated. I'd take Dynacos over them anyday and indeed, back in the day I did.
Click to expand...

Well, at least I now know not to put much stock in your opinion on speakers, and no doubt you're probably saying the same thing about mine. LOL I found my Dynaco A-25XLs to have great midrange, but that was about it. Everything else about them was substandard, especially the bass which was pretty much nonexistent. The highs were not particularly smooth either. BTW, I had my Dynacos direct coupled to a nice pair of Target stands that were sand filled to weigh about 70 pounds apiece. I was powering them with a very nice Pioneer SX-1080 receiver. I doubt they could have sounded appreciably better than what I was hearing, but perhaps I'm wrong there.

I have a friend who loves vintage Klipsch. I've heard his La Scalas hooked up to some vintage McIntosh and I hated the sound. Such is the nature of this hobby. He also loved his Dynaco A-25xls which he eventually sold me since I'd heard so much about them. I sold them very quickly and have never looked back. To be honest, just about any of the vintage KLHs are significantly better than the Dynacos in my opinion, but none of those KLHs are even in the same universe of the AR-3a. Oh well...
 
Last edited:
pabs911 said:
Well, at least I now know not to put much stock in your opinion on speakers, and no doubt you're probably saying the same thing about mine. LOL
Click to expand...

No doubt. :) Well Pabs if we all liked the same things we'd have nothing to talk about. The important thing is we're both pleased with what we have.
 
pabs911 said:
Not to worry. Your AR-3as are not remotely like AR-2axs in quality of sound. I've owned both types of each speaker... the 2ax with the large orange tweeter and the type with the small black tweeter. Also both types of AR-3as. You have the later ferrite woofers... in my opinion a bit unfortunate since I prefer the alnico woofer, but you might not be of the same opinion. Until you hear both at length, you'll never know. If you are anywhere near Tucson, AZ and want to hear mine, just shoot me a PM. I'll be happy to give you an extensive audition. :thmbsp:
Click to expand...
We'll see. Like Tom I don't have the greatest faith in AR speakers going by what I've heard. I absolutely hated AR-4x's. But I'm willing to give these their fair share since I think they look great. I honestly disagree with a lot of the opinions on vintage gear based on first hand experience, but I enjoy giving it all a whirl. They aren't going to be Quad ESLs but then, nothing else I've tried was, either. My Sony SS-m7 s are currently the sealed boxes to beat around here.
 
Pabs 911: i find it very hard to understand. I have tried a couple of speakers now, and maybe i dont know what bass is but my dynaco's are not bass free! Hell, maybe your acclimated to such superior speakers, but compared to the speakers i have, the dynaco is not shy of his bass! I think that maybe some guys likes and need the bass that goes down, real down, but for me, as long as i hear, even in a congested song, the notes made by the bass, and that i dont need to concentrate inmorder to hear the bass, well its enough for me. I have a pair of fonkens and those are bass free, i cant hear the bass. Im listening at the dynaco and its true, they are not bassy at all, but for me thats something i like, if theres too much bass, it takes my attention away from the midrange, theres just enough to hear the notes without any effort, but i barely feel the bass in my body like real low frequency does. I guess that what i love is the great midrange of the dynaco. Also, i think that i hate to have too much detailed highs as they get too much attention. Bare in mind that im listning to jazz nowadays, so to just follow the soloist play, i cant focus to the high hats and cymbals too much, otherwise i lose the soloist. So, for example the highs of the dm4 are suppose to be excellent, and they are, but it was just useless for me. When i listen to electronica and rock, things are different.


Im not sure if i understand when everyone says " we all have different ears". Thats not what i think is the problem. I think that its not what we hear but what we listen in a song that makes our taste so different. I love and always been in quest of challenging music. Its hard to explain our own taste! I come for a electronica background as im young, and electronica build my ears in a certain way. Electronica is so boringmmusically, theres often the minimum in electronica, that any complicated bars is
 
...which is never super complicated, but still, any changes of pattern of the bass notes or cymbal and hi hat is exciting. Anyways! What im saying is that i dont concentrate in the sound quality at all nowadays. With electronica., then rock, i really appreciated the sound production of zappa, or afx, but with jazz i love some shitty recording made in the 40's. Wow that wasnt clear, what in enjoy now, is to listen to super rich and filled music and be able to hear what each musician are doinh. Duh! Not clear again, what i look in a speaker is to be able to hear all the notes, or pattern for drums, made by all the instruments, without any effort. Also, with the speakers i have, the dynaco doesnt have a good bass compared to the imf, nor the highs of the dm4, but they permit me to hear, in perfect harmoby all the elements playibg together, and so far, the a25 are the best at that. They let me hear the song and the direction of the song. I think that with the celestion that was the most obvious for me, i couldnt follow any songs, didnt understood what i had to listen since i was hearing so much element i couldnt keep track of the melody...


God this whole post was unnessecary, sorry and my message wasnt intended to u directly
 
Last edited:
JohnVF said:
We'll see. Like Tom I don't have the greatest faith in AR speakers going by what I've heard. I absolutely hated AR-4x's. But I'm willing to give these their fair share since I think they look great. I honestly disagree with a lot of the opinions on vintage gear based on first hand experience, but I enjoy giving it all a whirl. They aren't going to be Quad ESLs but then, nothing else I've tried was, either. My Sony SS-m7 s are currently the sealed boxes to beat around here.
Click to expand...

I also did not like the pair of AR-4ax's I had, so I sold them. The tweeter in that speaker is very poor although the bass for such a small cabinet was actually pretty good. Now that I think about it, my opinions concerning vintage speakers have always been formed about speakers that were recapped, but my pair of Dynaco A-25XLs were not, actually. That might be why I have less respect for them than some of you do. They seemed to be working fine, but perhaps they weren't. Impossible to say now that they're gone.

Hey John... if you do get your AR-3As redone and you still don't like them, shoot me a PM. I might, just might be able to take them off your hands! lol

Tom Brennan said:
No doubt. :) Well Pabs if we all liked the same things we'd have nothing to talk about. The important thing is we're both pleased with what we have.
Click to expand...

Truer words were never spoke! :-)

murphythecat said:
Pabs 911: i find it very hard to understand. I have tried a couple of speakers now, and maybe i dont know what bass is but my dynaco's are not bass free! Hell, maybe your acclimated to such superior speakers, but compared to the speakers i have, the dynaco is not shy of his bass! I think that maybe some guys likes and need the bass that goes down, real down, but for me, as long as i hear, even in a congested song, the notes made by the bass, and that i dont need to concentrate inmorder to hear the bass, well its enough for me. I have a pair of fonkens and those are bass free, i cant hear the bass. Im listening at the dynaco and its true, they are not bassy at all, but for me thats something i like, if theres too much bass, it takes my attention away from the midrange, theres just enough to hear the notes without any effort, but i barely feel the bass in my body like real low frequency does. I guess that what i love is the great midrange of the dynaco. Also, i think that i hate to have too much detailed highs as they get too much attention. Bare in mind that im listning to jazz nowadays, so to just follow the soloist play, i cant focus to the high hats and cymbals too much, otherwise i lose the soloist. So, for example the highs of the dm4 are suppose to be excellent, and they are, but it was just useless for me. When i listen to electronica and rock, things are different.


Im not sure if i understand when everyone says " we all have different ears". Thats not what i think is the problem. I think that its not what we hear but what we listen in a song that makes our taste so different. I love and always been in quest of challenging music. Its hard to explain our own taste! I come for a electronica background as im young, and electronica build my ears in a certain way. Electronica is so boringmmusically, theres often the minimum in electronica, that any complicated bars is
Click to expand...

When I say they have no bass, I am not being literal of course. The problem I have is that the A-25 has a 10 inch woofer with a small alnico magnet that is just too tiny to get that big cone really moving. I think that's part of the reason why the midrange is so good... the woofer isn't moving as much as it normally would and therefore the midrange is less distorted. The bass on my KLH model 6's is FAR FAR better than my Dynacos. Actually, the model 6 is a far superior speaker overall. Like I said though... perhaps mine were out of spec and needed recapping. It's possible...
 
Last edited:
And thats the mist important poiny. For example my father prefered probably the celestion, but when i explained what im actually looking to hear in a song, he agreed that the a25 were the best at delivering what i need
 
I was not fond of the AR-4xs myself- an original pair, a restored pair, and a modded pair. I wasn't expecting much of the 3a and it's siblings, the AR-11s and AR-10Pis.

I was pleasantly surprised with them, however.

The owner of these claims a big part of the reason his sound as good as they do is the amplification he has on hand, which are big honking monsters of power, adding a finer degree of control over the woofers.

That's his claim, and they sounded great, so perhaps he's correct.
 
thedelihaus said:
You are influencing me terribly!

I echo your opinion of the Dynaco a25s, in my setup, being a tad muddy in the bass department- other folks rooms (and speaker reactions to) and setups (gear influencing end sound) may vary greatly from my experience (or not), but that's what it did in my room.

I also own Thiel CS 2s (model before the 2.2/2 2) and find them nothing less than incredible (only when mated with the correct amplification and pre-amp- they are one of the more picky speakers I've owned).

The Indignias- if you give them such a ringing endorsement, I must pay attention.


But to be honest, I'd like to see what could be done at a higher budget- $200-$400 in drivers, perhaps a three way design even, and maybe a touch bigger.


Just for reference, how low do the Indignias go?
Click to expand...

Paul,
I don't know how low the Indignias get, I'm sure you can find the specs from Zilch on the build. The bass drivers are only 5.5 inches. Pretty much the same size as on the some of the earlier Thiels. It's amazing how much tight bass they can produce. But you have to remember they are still only bookshelf sized speakers.

I can make a huge list of speakers they have out performed. Including B&W, AR, LA, ADS, Alison and the Thiel CS 1.2s. It just blows me away how such a inexpensive DIY speaker can sound so good.

Oh and sorry for terribly influencing you and btw... the Indignias sound much like the Grado RS2i. The only difference is that you can "feel" the bass. :D
 
pabs911 said:
When I say they have no bass, I am not being literal of course. The problem I have is that the A-25 has a 10 inch woofer with a small alnico magnet that is just too tiny to get that big cone really moving. ...
Click to expand...


Well whatever the reason for the character of the bass I doubt it's because the magnet is too small. It's either moving at the frequency and amplitude intended or it isn't. There's a rolloff on the bottom (as with all speakers) and a driver with the same cone and compliance that had a bigger magnet (more efficiency) would roll off at a higher frequency, not a lower one. Hoffman's Iron Law.

I'm assuming the Dyna has a lighter woofer cone than your ARs which (among other things) allows them to respond high enough to cross to a tweeter and be used in a 2-way. If your ARs have a more powerful motor then to get deeper they have to add mass to the cone (and lose efficiency). Added mass can mean less ability to reproduce midrange which means a dedicated midrange driver is needed. But if a dedicated mid driver was intended anyway........

It'a all a juggling act.
 
onepixel said:
Paul,
I don't know how low the Indignias get, I'm sure you can find the specs from Zilch on the build. The bass drivers are only 5.5 inches. Pretty much the same size as on the some of the earlier Thiels. It's amazing how much tight bass they can produce. But you have to remember they are still only bookshelf sized speakers.

I can make a huge list of speakers they have out performed. Including B&W, AR, LA, ADS, Alison and the Thiel CS 1.2s. It just blows me away how such a inexpensive DIY speaker can sound so good.

Oh and sorry for terribly influencing you and btw... the Indignias sound much like the Grado RS2i. The only difference is that you can "feel" the bass. :D
Click to expand...


actually, the indignia uses the 7" aluminum cone dayton driver. IIRC it's -3db point is around 40hz, which is about the same as an EPI100.
 
Tom Brennan said:
Well whatever the reason for the character of the bass I doubt it's because the magnet is too small. It's either moving at the frequency and amplitude intended or it isn't. There's a rolloff on the bottom (as with all speakers) and a driver with the same cone and compliance that had a bigger magnet (more efficiency) would roll off at a higher frequency, not a lower one. Hoffman's Iron Law.

I'm assuming the Dyna has a lighter woofer cone than your ARs which (among other things) allows them to respond high enough to cross to a tweeter and be used in a 2-way. If your ARs have a more powerful motor then to get deeper they have to add mass to the cone (and lose efficiency). Added mass can mean less ability to reproduce midrange which means a dedicated midrange driver is needed. But if a dedicated mid driver was intended anyway........

It'a all a juggling act.
Click to expand...

No woofer with a small magnet that I've ever seen could make low bass. It just doesn't happen... but, your second comments describe what Acoustic Research meant to do when designing the AR-3A. I think they succeeded very nicely indeed. The woofer cone in the AR-3A has a lot of mass with that large thick ring around/near the dustcap.
 
Years ago I met a fella who designed drivers at Jensen, back when they were in Chicago. He said he liked foam surrounds because they do a good job of damping waves that move outward along the cone and can be reflected back by the surround causing dips and peaks in the response.

Note that some drivers considered to be of very high quality use them.
 
pabs911 said:
No woofer with a small magnet that I've ever seen could make low bass. It just doesn't happen...
Click to expand...

If you're ever in the Atlanta area, I'd invite you to hear my old DIY speakers with Vifa C17WG19, 6.5" woofers (with 10 ounce magnets, and one inch voice coils) in them. Let me play Enya's "The Longships"... complete with 10 foot ceremonial Celtic bass drum... through them. At levels that will make stuff in the room start to vibrate, at 28 Hz...

No, they won't play THAT loud. But, they will astound the crap out of you, with how much authority they have, at 30 Hz...

I actually have a pair of the 4 ohm version of the A25XL woofer (ceramic magnet). BassBox tells me they'd just KILL in about a 4.5 cubic foot cabinet, with a passive radiator. Bass down to 28 Hz (f3). I happen to have a pair of 4.5 cubic foot unfinished (bare MDF) cabinets, that I need to use for SOMETHING, SOME DAY... :scratch2:

Regards,
Gordon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom