Received: by 10.180.88.195 with SMTP id bi3mr2618643wib.3.1346185355538;
        Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:22:35 -0700 (PDT)
Path: e9ni61523466wia.0!nntp.google.com!goblin3!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: John Stone <jmse...@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: rec.antiques.radio+phono
Subject: Re: Where's The Logic
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:22:33 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <CC6292B9.B3C58%jmsent2@comcast.net>
References: <6544e28b-3e29-413c-9ac5-1294da03f041@googlegroups.com> <503ae6e3$0$15069$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <Fe-dnZjtWoI0GKbNnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1208271238400.23565@darkstar.example.net> <9LmdnfWspq5cTabNnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@earthlink.com> <503be98d$0$7623$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews.com> <MKWdnQ-QseF4YKbNnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@earthlink.com> <503c077d$0$7477$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews.com> <gIKdnc_2OeCotqHNnZ2dnVY3gomdnZ2d@giganews.com> <MM6dnTnv79Y8TaHNnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <CC624011.B3C47%jmsent2@comcast.net> <8PGdnaiHG5iIQaHNnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <CC626C6D.B3C4C%jmsent2@comcast.net> <C9GdnWnbS-06gqDNnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c124e3817c283f0df1901f0e61b9f7e8";
	logging-data="12252"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/a12JL0o/mcwe5Q1zTopgK"
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.23.0.091001
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tsJIeupWpteDhHKrXgilvMwCveE=
Thread-Index: Ac2FWtrrdeuyjoRLNk2Hv1MIo8dnlw==
Thread-Topic: Where's The Logic
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit




On 8/28/12 5:44 PM, in article
C9GdnWnbS-06gqDNnZ2dnUVZ_o-dn...@earthlink.com, "conklin"
<nilknoc...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> 
> "John Stone" <jmse...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:CC626C6D.B3C4C%jmsent2@comcast.net...
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8/28/12 12:56 PM, in article
>> 8PGdnaiHG5iIQaHNnZ2dnUVZ_uOdn...@earthlink.com, "conklin"
>> <nilknoc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> "John Stone" <jmse...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:CC624011.B3C47%jmsent2@comcast.net...

>>> 
>>> Did you like the early AR speakers?
>>> 
>> I thought the AR's were very good in  bass performance for their day. But
>> the midrange was recessed and the highs were very rolled off, making them
>> sound dull. My preference back in those days was for the British speakers
>> like Quads, Spendor, IMF, etc.
>> 
> 
> Bass was "good for their day?"  Only if you took size into account.  The AR
> were low-efficiency.  All bass-reflex systems were vastly better and still
> are. 
> 
I don't equate low efficiency with low quality. AR speakers were meant for
home audio, not sound reinforcement, and could play plenty loud with their
acoustic suspension design and the available power in their day.  You asked
me about early AR speakers. I took "early" as the period from the first AR1
through the AR3a (mid 50's to late 60's). Thiele/Small parameters had not
even been invented until the early 70's, and before that (and quite a long
time after), most reflex systems were far better on paper than in real life.
The aforementioned L100 being a case in point with a woofer with far too
high Qts and Fs for the cabinet it was in. The result was a system with a
6dB peak at 70Hz and a steep 4th order rolloff below. A virtual "boombox"
Whereas the AR3 could easily manage mid 30Hz bass- flat, and with low
distortion. Yes, it was inefficient, but even with its small size, it could
reach deeper in the bass than most, including even giant corner horn systems
like Klipshorns. What are some of your examples of "vastly better" reflex
systems of the day?