Acoustic Research AR-3a
- Thread starter Rome
- Start date
TerryO
Super Member
I'd say that 60 watts is the minimum for those power hungary AR 3a's. I've got a pair of them myself and have learned that they need:
1. Enough power
2. A bit of distance between them and the listening position (I'd estimate about 12feet).
The AR amplifier (rated 60 watts) was a very good match for the AR 3a (Duh) and is still an excellent sounding amplifier (if you can find one in working condition), but the output transistors haven't been produced in decades and there isn't, evidently, any viable substitute.
Another tip, get some distance back from them as mentioned above and if they are on the floor, cant them back a few degrees. It can really improve the sound. I had a friend that bought his in 1968 and when I tilted them back a bit (I used some magazines) he thought they sounded better than he'd ever heard them in 30+ years.
Best Regards,
TerryO
Last edited:
Wow, this thread is a moldy oldie! Well personally I wouldn't give this choice a second thought, I'd go with the 140 wpc Luxman setup without a doubt. I'd keep the Sansui around as a backup unit though, it's a good one.
furnitureguy
Active Member
Back in the early 70's, when I bought my first pair of AR-3a's I drove them with a Sansui 5000x and thought they sounded fine (50 or so wpc @ 8 ohms - not sure at 4 ohms)
I have my current 3a's paired up with a Marantz 2285b and they sound superb!
Sometime soon - I want to see what the 3a's will do with a bit more power - my Marantz 2385.
I have my current 3a's paired up with a Marantz 2285b and they sound superb!
Sometime soon - I want to see what the 3a's will do with a bit more power - my Marantz 2385.
davidro
Lunatic Member
I seem to recall you said you preferred the Allison over the 3a. Has that changed with the new amp?
AV amps often don't do 4 ohms. Make sure it does that before you connect it.
TerryO
Super Member
Actually, if an amp isn't driven into clipping (the real enemy of speakers) you probably wouldn't notice much difference. By the way, the actual difference between davidro's amplifiers (55 wpc vs. 115 wpc) is only about 3 dB. Not all amps sound alike, but not having enough reserve power on hand can change the sound, or worse yet, drive the amp into clipping and fry the tweeters.
Most of the AK forum people already know this, but just in case someone new to this stuff is reading...
The tilting of the speaker helps to align the driver's into a better phase relationship, while the distance helps to integrate the sound a bit. It would have been nice if they had offered them as mirror imaged pairs, but that approach became common later on.
Best Regards,
TerryO
Last edited:
furnitureguy
Active Member
I haven't had a chance yet to try out the 3a's on the new amp. The 3a's are out in my shop - upstairs in the office in a cramped hard to get at space. My back has been bothering me for sometime - as soon as I feel like lifting heavy stuff I will bring the 3'as back in the house and hook them up to the 2385. Stay tuned...
wsissons
Super Member
Ive ran my 3as with a hk 930 using a grant fidelity 09 tube dac/ preamp with great success..............I like the 930 amp section.....it has no problem with 4 ohm loads.........Its only 45 watts a side into 8 ohms .........I would like to use two 930s with the dac use the solid state output of the dac for the woofer and the tube output for the mids and tweeters just a thought.......
Last edited:
Gang-Twanger
Resident Wharfedaliophool
Actually, that makes a lot of sense (The height part, not the bookshelf thing). My Wharfedales have a similar design..... 12" 3-ways, non-mirror-imaged (except for the power-hungry woofer), and you really-have to get them off the floor (18" or so) or at the very-least tilt them back a bit so the tweeters are pointing at the listener's head.
Copa1934
My ears are bleeding
It's a shame, in a way, that "bookshelf" has stuck to a size of speaker and where it's "supposed" to be placed. Bookselves were "all the craze" years ago, let's face it, no computers (till late 70's), no game machines, so people were outside, or watching TV or reading. What better way to "fit" you're system than a bookshelf desgin? And it didn't end with just speakers. Check the ads back "in the day" and you will find many amps and receivers advertised as being shallow enough to fit in a bookshelf.
Sadly it seems that being a "bookshelf" speaker means that is the only place it will sound "right". Depends on the type of bookshelf. Depends on whether the speaker is sealed, front ported or rear ported. Does the bookself have a back, is it open, is it close or away from the wall?
One thing for sure, whether floor or bookshelf, most seem to benefit from being tilted back or raised or both.
Every book shelf speaker I have ever had has sounded better out from the wall, on a stand, in free space, with the nearness of the wall behind it being used to tune the low end response and imaging. Some like to be close, some didn't. The only pair that sounded markedly better on their sides were Altec Boleros.
gkimeng
Forum Mod, ClassicSpeakerPages.net
If you look at old home magazines from the 50's and early 60's, hifi speakers were all either big floorstanders or "bookshelf" boxes, because speaker stands wouldn't become common for years to come. And "bookshelves" were often tall and deep enough to hold entire audio systems. There's a reason why classic AR's are almost universally 10-14" wide; they were meant to be laid on their sides in the same home bookshelves that were being used for record storage, surrounded by records and books. AR's own test measurement setup before they built their own anechoic test chamber was to bury the speaker face up outdoors and position the mikes above it.
Why is it "sad" that using something in a manner other than the way it was designed to be used produces less than optimal performance? Isn't that just an inevitable fact of life?