At least with the few ADS crossover I have seen, they were laid out nice, caps were ok, but they used fairly light gauge inductor bobbins, which in my experience leads to needless crossover DC resistance.
While the use of silicone and hot glue by ESS appears on the surface cheap, (and a pain to redo 40 years later) I like the idea of a "free flowing' crossover design, with excellent large gauge inductors coils-something you rarely saw in those days-usually the small plastic bobbins, transformers (Klipsch) or maybe solid cores.
Caps could have been better, and resistors (many used sand cast back then as well), but I don't have a problem with the basic thought process in the crossover.
The stock AMT3's woofer could have been better IMHO, but the stock ones IMHO could have been improved with baffle bracing, and perhaps a adjustment to the stock port specs, or just completely sealing them, probably the later.
DLK, another smaller USA based manufacture was they same as far as crossover construction/layout.
They did there higher end cabinets in house, hand wound inductor coils and voice coils, and yes used hot glue, and hard wired crossovers.
They also ran complete test on each completed speaker.
ESS farmed out their cabs, but I don't have a problem with that, as it spreads out more revenue for other smaller business.
I personally dig the appearance of the AMT3's, as their look IMHO has a unique classic look that means business.
Most guest will always comment "what are those? etc.
After a listen-'where can I get some?"
The Germans have their own philosophy of manufacturing etc, and differs from the USA in many ways. Who's is better IMHO is a matter of opinion, at least as it pertains to speakers. I have read enough stories of Oskar Heil's issues with ESS (mainly he wanted a single smaller woofer right next to the Great Heil-8"'s or less), but he could have gone German, but didn't-water under the bridge.
Nelson Pass had a hand in the early ESS design AMT1's and 3's.
My earlier ESS AMT'3s crossovers were probably constructed more crudely then the later versions. Particle board with a small P.C, and huge stacks of the 12 resistor Zobel, glued and silicone. Go figure.
The basic thought process in the AMT1's and 3's was excellent IMHO.
Could it have been executed better?
No doubt.
But that's what forums like this one are for.
They have already done most of the foot work.
The mistakes and draw backs have become apparent and identified over the last 40 years or so.
So all you are left with is how to properly execute those changes.
Still can be a handful-but the basic philosophy of design9 the most difficult part) and basic foot work was done years ago.
But in this age of information at your finger tips, it's not really that difficult-just time consuming.
The ESS AMT speakers are IMHO a timeless classic design, who's flaws can be easily minimized , to a point where they can give any speaker, regardless of price and era a serious run for the money.
This, in a long drawn out nutshell, was my whole point in posting my thoughts, ideas and opinions on the AMT3's over the years.
They are well worth the effort......