AR's Edgar Villchur and Roy Allison interview

[Urizen]

I thought this would be of interest.

Regards,

Ken

 

[Doug G.]

Thanks for this, Ken. It's fascinating reading about all these things that were going on when I was just a kid. :thmbsp:

I hope these guys get reminded of how much their efforts really meant and mean to an awful lot of people.

Doug

 

[Toasted Almond]

You'll have a helluva time reminding Kloss of anything at this juncture.

 

[Dean P]

I thought this would be of interest.

Regards,

Ken

I love this
QUOTE; Lander: However long gone you may be from AR, you maintain strong views about hi-fi. In fact, you initially balked at doing this interview because you feel that many aspects of high-end audio, such as expensive cables and equipment break-in, are meaningless.

Villchur: The concluding paragraph of a talk I once gave at an Acoustical Society meeting sums that up. I'll read you part of it: "Scientific method allows investigators to form hypotheses in any way they please: out of a cold assembly of facts, intuition, or a drunken stupor....Once a hypothesis is proposed, however, it must be demonstrated rigorously. The audio discipline needs to be brought back to the world of reason." Unquote :thmbsp:

 

[Doug G.]

You'll have a helluva time reminding Kloss of anything at this juncture.

There's always a smart ass. :tongue:

I was, of course, referring to the two gentlemen named in the title of the thread.

Doug

 

[Toasted Almond]

At the party I attended where Villchur and Kloss were present, a exuberant attendee asked Ed Villchur, "How do you think the AR-303 compares to the AR-3a (which the 303 was kind of targeted towards)?

Villchur's response? "See that ****ing (expletive USED by Villchur) guy over there (pointing to a uniformed security guard hired for the event)? Go ask him. He can tell you better than I can!"


When my buddy Ray told Kloss, "You know, I have a damn houseful of speakers because of you!" Kloss IMMEDIATELY replied, "At least I made them small!"

 

[jbpollock]

It was interesting to me to see that my AR-5's were mentioned:

"All the speakers, with the exception of the AR-5, were phenomenally successful."

These use basically the same tweeter and mid as the 3a but with a 10 inch woofer rather than a 12. My onlly guess as to why it would not be successful is that the price difference between the two models was relatively small, so perhaps people who were shopping in the high end range anyway just went all out and bought the 3a.

 

[Toasted Almond]

I know that's why people bought the AR-3a as opposed to the AR-2ax. I had AR-5's, and am real sorry I ever sold them. To me, every bit as nice as the 3a.

 

[Andyman]

Ooops, didn't see this thread before I posted the same link in the AR-1 thread.

 

[lasminit2]

Another factor was thta in showrooms, with speakers lined up on shelves next to each other, and generally up against a wall, the AR-5 wouldn't "Sound" much better than the AR-2ax (not like they would positioned properly). The 3a, however would sound even "bigger", although hopefully people got them out from walls and up on their little 8" stands when they got home! Also, the styling of the 3A was "bolder" with its thick bezel. The 5a just looked so much like a 2ax that if you were upgrading, it didn't appear all that different. Amazingly, a LOT of AR's were sold via the Allied (and other) catalogs...and appearance would have really counted there. Amazing to think that internet sales were still were still 30 years away! The description I recall in the Allied ctalog was a page of small pictures with about a short paragraph on each. The AR-5 didn't arrive on the scene until saeveral years after the 2ax, and by then there was also a lot more competition for speaker dollars. Advent had arrived, for example.

 

[dc270]

Speaking of AR, who wass the driving force or master engineer of the AR9, & 90 fame? Was it not built to address the 200hz room problem as well? Just being "big" was not its claim to fame....just wondering about its illustrious people and history as well.
DC

 

[Tom Brennan]

Speaking of AR, who wass the driving force or master engineer of the AR9, & 90 fame? Was it not built to address the 200hz room problem as well? Just being "big" was not its claim to fame....just wondering about its illustrious people and history as well.
DC

I think that was Ken Kantor, he did the AR "magic" speaker. Did the original NHTs too.

 

[dc270]

HMMMM....."Tim Holl" name comes up in some AR9 archives....
DC

 

[RayW]

I think that was Ken Kantor, he did the AR "magic" speaker. Did the original NHTs too.

Heck, ask him. He posts around here now and then.

Ray

 

[ken kantor]

Nah, I was still a student during the 9-series development, and working at AR only part-time. It was a great learning experience, but I can't take any design credit during that era. More like, "Hey Ken, come in over the weekend and build up this crossover. See ya Monday..."

The 9 was a very ambitious product, and a collaborative effort. Some of the major ideas embodied in the 9 came from Bob Berkovitz's "Research" department; others came from Tim Holl's "Engineering" Department. To the best of my memory, Tim was the project manager, and had final design responsibility. Other key names that come to mind are Alex DeKoster, Steve Goldstein and Jim Kates. There were others I am forgetting, no doubt.

-k

www.kenkantor.com

"$50... it's the new $20!"