스피커/AR

AR3a vs AR2ax

AdultKid(오디오/스피커) 2015. 3. 4.

절대적인 스피커 능력치 차이는 AR3a 가 상급기인만큼 중저역에서 더 우수하다.

하지만, AR2ax 의 매칭의 유연성과 더 저렴한 가격은 선호도차이를 불러일으킨다. AR3a 는 앰프밥을 많이 먹어서 그 당시 기라성 같은 진공관, 빈티지 앰프들을 대부분 거부한다. 시집보내기 힘든 억센 공주처럼. 상대적으로 AR2ax 는 매칭의 폭이 훨~~씬 넓다.

I have a pair of really nice AR2ax speakers but have never been able to get into their sound. To my ears they're very neutral but just don't sound very open or have a very dynamic soundstage like my KLH Model 5's do. I have driven them with a Marantz 2265, Yamaha 1020, Marantz 2250, and Fisher 500C. I have a line on a pair of restored AR3a's but the tech who is selling them lives out of sate so I can't listen to them. I'm just wondering if I don't care that much for the AR2ax speakers would I like the AR3a speakers?

ssmith3046, Aug 21, 2011 #1

gogofast

AK Subscriber

Subscriber

were your 2ax's recapped and Lpad refurbished?

anyways, the 3a's are definitely more capable speakers than the 2ax's. deeper bass and overall wider coverage. 3a is a lot bigger too. i'd definitely go get them.

gogofast, Aug 21, 2011 #2

juncers

Reasonably skeptical about everything

Subscriber

I own and love both. The 3As go deeper in the bass and have several other small improvements, but if you dislike the overall sound of your 2AXs, you won't be impressed with the 3As. The difference in sound quality is subtle not transformational.

Ray

juncers, Aug 22, 2011 #3

kirk57

DreamState

Subscriber

The KLH model 5s you have competed with the AR-3a and were voiced brighter than the ARs. If you like the sound of the 5s and not the 2ax, the 3a likely won't do it for you.

kirk57, Aug 22, 2011 #4

pabs911

Well-Known Member

kirk57 said: ↑

The KLH model 5s you have competed with the AR-3a and were voiced brighter than the ARs. If you like the sound of the 5s and not the 2ax, the 3a likely won't do it for you.

I also doubt you'll like the AR-3a if you didn't like the 2ax. After having said that though... the AR-3a is in an entirely different league from the 2ax in sound quality and I've owned multiple pairs of each. The 2ax is a very laid back nice to listen to speaker whereas the AR-3a is too as well as far more dynamic, detailed, and artful. To my ears, the differences are not small.

pabs911, Aug 22, 2011 #5

dc270

Now Off The Reservation.....

Subscriber

I agree the Ar2Ax's are laid back- the 3a's are noticably more robust sounding. Given the choice of the two I would go with the 3a's over the 2Ax's.

dc270, Aug 22, 2011 #6

audiojones

Jonesin' for audio

Subscriber

The AR3a has a more wide open midrange and extended bass response, but if you don't care for the sound of the 2ax chances are that you won't care for the 3a either.

audiojones, Aug 22, 2011 #7

ssmith3046

Super Member

Thanks for all of your feedback. I appreciate it.

ssmith3046, Aug 22, 2011 #8

sstring

Active Member

I agree with the above.

I have a pair of AR11(C), the replacements for the AR3A and I love them! By far the best speakers I have ever owned. I also have a nice pair od AR2AX and 2 pair of Dynaco A25's which are very warm and musical but limited on extreme lows.

I find the AR2AX very neutral but very clear on the bass end, a little thin on the midrange with the L-Pads at 75% volume. Good quality but not quite warm enough on some music, very good on Jazz and classical music. Not so great on Pop music.

On the AR3's be careful buying them, be sure that they don't need a lot of work on the mid and high controls or crossover cap's. This can get expensive to bring up to spec!

sstring, Aug 22, 2011 #9

ssmith3046

Super Member

The AR3a speakers I'm thinking about have been totally restored. I always thought that my AR2ax speaker were great for jazz.

ssmith3046, Aug 22, 2011 #10

davidro

Lunatic Member

I'd get them having enjoyed my new 3a in a not restored state last night. They did wonders with jazz too. Very realistic live sound. Surprisingly revealing too.

davidro, Aug 22, 2011 #11

gogofast

AK Subscriber

Subscriber

whether you liked the 2ax's or not, 3a is definitely worth getting. i was into AR all along, but when i first heard the 3a properly restored, i was shocked at how good they sounded.

gogofast, Aug 23, 2011 #12

tubed

Addicted Member

I agree. The 2ax is laid back.

But seem to really open up nicely when powered by large-ish "high current" amplification..they sound like crud with tubes.

tubed, Aug 23, 2011 #13

ssmith3046

Super Member

Great feedback and thanks. I decided not to buy the AR3a speakers. I really enjoy my KLH Model 5's and they sound fantastic with my old Fisher 500C. They just fill the whole room with music and the speakers disappear. Maybe one day I'll buy a pair of AR3a speakers but not today.

ssmith3046, Aug 24, 2011 #14

DON73

MSGT USAF 1955-1976

Most of the "fully restored" AR3a speakers have had an asking price that was way too high for me. I really like the AR2ax for classical and jazz. I have a nice pair of AR11s that I've played with a 30 watt tube amp. They sounded very good but I need to hook them up to my 300watt power amp.

If you really like your 5s forget speaker shopping and just listen:thmbsp:

AR3a VS AR2ax

Discussion in 'Speakers' started by timsclips, Dec 2, 2013.

Page 1 of 2

12Next >

timsclips

AK Subscriber

Subscriber

Other than the expected bass improvement for the larger speaker, is there any difference in the sound of the two siblings?

Any difference in power-handling abilities?

timsclips, Dec 2, 2013 #1

pabs911

Well-Known Member

timsclips said: ↑

Other than the expected bass improvement for the larger speaker, is there any difference in the sound of the two siblings?

Any difference in power-handling abilities?

AR3a is an Aston Martin DB5, and an AR-2ax is a Chevy Impala.

pabs911, Dec 2, 2013 #2

artbrewer

Active Member

Many prefer the 2AX its far from being a chevy impala

artbrewer, Dec 2, 2013 #3

Guest105

Super Member

AR3a is an Aston Martin DB5, and an AR-2ax is a Chevy Impala.

I've restored and owned both (along with most of the other classic AR speakers). Neither are Aston Martins, nor Impalas. They are actually quite similar in character, although the 3a does go a bit lower and, to me, is a bit more dynamic.

For their era, they were outstanding...and still hold up quite well today, but are not comparable to high-quality modern speakers.

Peak power handling for the 2ax was specified at 100 watts....150 for the 3a.

For what it's worth, I sold my LST-2's, 3a's and 2ax's...kept my 2a's, 5's, 4x's and 6's. The only one I have some regrets about is the LST-2's, but I just didn't have a place for them.

Guest105, Dec 2, 2013 #4

pabs911

Well-Known Member

artbrewer said: ↑

Many prefer the 2AX its far from being a chevy impala

I've owned 5 pair of AR-3As, 3 pair of AR-2AXs, 6 pair of AR-4Xs, 1 pair of AR-2s and refurbished them all... new caps, polished pots, completely redone cabinets. I know what I'm talking about from first hand experience. The AR-2AX is significantly inferior to the AR-3A to my ears. The AR-3A is one of my favorite vintage speakers, thus the DB5 reference. The AR-2AX is most certainly NOT, thus the Impala reference! I had in mind a 1965 Impala, not an altogether bad automobile, but no DB5.

Here are the specifics to my mind...

The midrange in the AR-2AX is rather a poor one. The domed mid in the AR-3A is excellent in every way.

The tweeters in the two speakers are very similar and are quite good.

The woofer in the AR-2AX is less than ordinary. The woofer in the AR-3/AR-3A is simply outstanding! The two woofers may look alike, but they are light years distant from each other in the quality of their music reproduction.

BTW, the AR-3A is capable of being taken to an all new level of performance by simply replacing the tweeter with a better more modern one. I've found that a nice vintage Dynaudio soft dome tweeter balances the speaker beautifully while also increasing dynamics and detail. However, I would never suggest anyone do such a thing to an AR-2AX because I don't think the speaker is worthy of it... ie. too small a payoff.

Look, there are very good reasons why a nice pair of AR-2AXs sell for roughly $250.00 while a nice pair of AR-3As commonly sell for north of $1000.00. To my ears, they are nothing like "similar" in any way, shape, or form.

Last edited: Dec 2, 2013

pabs911, Dec 2, 2013 #5

Guest105

Super Member

Opinions vary. pabs911, think about becoming a subscriber and helping to support this great community, where audio opinions can be shared and discussed.

Guest105, Dec 3, 2013 #6

Fairlane

AK Subscriber

Subscriber

Having owned 2AX's and currently owning a set of 3's (I know they are different from 3A's) I can say that I thought the AX's were great for everyday listening, background music etc. They do a lot of things right.

Seemed to do well with solid state or tubes and are easier to drive.

But for critical serious evaluation of material, gear or pure enjoyment; the 3A's all the way.

Just my .02 cents worth.

Fairlane, Dec 3, 2013 #7

pabs911

Well-Known Member

kcbluesman said: ↑

Opinions vary. pabs911, think about becoming a subscriber and helping to support this great community, where audio opinions can be shared and discussed.

I've actually thought about becoming a subscriber many times, but have yet to do it. I'm not sure why you would bring such a suggestion to a thread about speakers though. This forum allows me to post free of charge, so I don't think your suggestion has any relevance to this discussion.

As to how or why anyone would prefer an AR-2AX to an AR-3A pair, I'm completely at a loss. I also don't understand how some people prefer dull tasteless food over spicy interesting food, but some actually do. As you say, opinions vary. I gave mine which is based on first hand knowledge. What you do with it is up to you.

artbrewer said: ↑

Many prefer the 2AX its far from being a chevy impala

A 1965 Impala is a nice enough car. I'd prefer the DB5 though.

Last edited: Dec 3, 2013

pabs911, Dec 3, 2013 #8

Guest105

Super Member

Wow...your response is very rude. You gave your opinion, and I gave mine. Seems like the fact that mine - which is also based on quite a bit of experience - differs from yours has made you angry.

I certainly didn't couple my opinion with a personalization, or imply that your opinion is less valid than mine. But if it makes you feel better, you are certainly free to be a jerk...at least until the moderators reign you in.

As for the suggestion to become a subscriber; I saw by your number of posts that you seem to get quite a bit of use out of this forum, and wanted to remind you that helping to support it will assure its continued operation.

By the way, I do not prefer the AR-2ax to the 3a, nor did I make any statement to that effect. I did, however, keep my 2a's (among others) and sell the AR-3a's (among others).

Last edited: Dec 3, 2013

Guest105, Dec 3, 2013 #9

pabs911

Well-Known Member

kcbluesman said: ↑

Wow...your response is very rude. You gave your opinion, and I gave mine. Seems like the fact that mine - which is also based on quite a bit of experience - differs from yours has made you angry.

As for the suggestion to become a subscriber; I saw by your number of posts that you seem to get a bit of use out of this forum, and wanted to remind you that helping to support it will assure its continued operation.

I'm not angry at all, and to be honest, I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. Look, I don't come here to get into it with anyone. I'm very comfortable with everything I've written here because it is my honest opinion. That it doesn't coincide with yours seems to have upset you somehow. That is unfortunate, but ultimately, I come here to discuss hi fi. I can leave the personal stuff for the moderators to deal with.

pabs911, Dec 3, 2013 #10

Guest105

Super Member

Uh-huh.

Guest105, Dec 3, 2013 #11

hionfi

Well-Known Member

AR 3A Fan

At HIONFI we're big fans of all AR speakers, they can fit the budget minded buyer or the collector. We're big fans of the 3A, please see the attached rehab work done on one of our pairs.

PS: Our LST-2's, 3's 3A's, 2AX's and 4ax's all get equal playing time in the store.

Attached Files:

AR3a_2.JPG

File size:96.3 KB

AR_Before_1.jpg

File size:97.2 KB

AR3a_4.JPG

File size:122.8 KB

AR_Cap_Before_A.jpg

File size:98.2 KB

AR_Cap_After.jpg

File size:87.6 KB

hionfi, Dec 3, 2013 #12

pabs911

Well-Known Member

kcbluesman said: ↑

Uh-huh.

I probably should have spoken directly about what I was referring to...

I once went to a dinner in Kansas City with a business associate from Ireland who loved BBQ. After about 5 minutes of eating his food, I noticed he was beginning to flop sweat pretty badly. I asked him what was the matter, and he said the BBQ was very spicy. Well, I was eating the very same BBQ as he was, and I thought it was no more than mildly spicy. As it turns out, Irish food is generally considered bland by US standards, and no doubt US food is considered rather spicy to the Irish. So I learned something that day and have never forgotten it.

I see now that you thought that comment was aimed at you when it really was meant as a generalization about varying tastes. I blame the nature of conversing on the net. No inflection or tone assistance. Only context, which often isn't enough.

pabs911, Dec 3, 2013 #13

pabs911

Well-Known Member

hionfi said: ↑

At HIONFI we're big fans of all AR speakers, they can fit the budget minded buyer or the collector. We're big fans of the 3A, please see the attached rehab work done on one of our pairs.

PS: Our LST-2's, 3's 3A's, 2AX's and 4ax's all get equal playing time in the store.

I did my AR-3A restorations very similar to yours. I used good quality film caps for the midrange and tweeter, and a NPE cap for the woofer. I also replaced the rock wool filled AR-3As with Owens pink fiberglass. I used a dremel to polish the pots back to near new. I used Duct Seal to reseal the drivers to the baffle. I then completely refinished the cabinets. Done! Not new, but in some ways better than new because of the superior caps. Here are a couple of my restorations...

[IMG]

Last edited: Dec 3, 2013

pabs911, Dec 3, 2013 #14

hionfi

Well-Known Member

That's a great looking pair of 3A's, nice work!

hionfi, Dec 3, 2013 #15

pabs911

Well-Known Member

Here is some more of my work...

[IMG]

hionfi said: ↑

That's a great looking pair of 3A's, nice work!

Thank you very much. :) I feel that the AR-3/3A is one of the most beautiful bookshelf speakers ever made. That wide inward sloping frame around the baffle is the key.

Last edited: Dec 3, 2013

pabs911, Dec 3, 2013 #16

davidro

Lunatic Member

kcbluesman said: ↑

For their era, they were outstanding...and still hold up quite well today, but are not comparable to high-quality modern speakers.

I like my modern speakers.

Have had a few pairs and will have more.

Another pair on its way as we speak.

Having said that, AR3a is a pair of speakers that I will not get rid of.

They're not inferior. They're just different.

But I do see why some would think of them to be inferior.

davidro, Dec 3, 2013 #17

davidro

Lunatic Member

Great looking restoration job pabs. Well-done.

davidro, Dec 3, 2013 #18

pabs911

Well-Known Member

davidro said: ↑

Great looking restoration job pabs. Well-done.

Thanks davidro.

I can see how some might not prefer the sound of AR-3As to modern speakers. My current speakers in my main 2 channel system are ESB 7/07 towers from the early 1980s, but I hope to someday be able to afford to keep a pair of AR-3As. I always end up selling them because they are worth too much on the open market! :-(

pabs911, Dec 3, 2013 #19

Guest105

Super Member

Agreed.

It also helps to carefully read people's posts. As noted above, I did not say that I prefer the AR2ax to the 3a. Posting your comment under a quote from my earlier post implies that I did.

The 3a's are fine speakers. The 2ax's are quite good as well, but less so. It is my opinion that they are much more alike than they are different. I prefer the AR-5 over the AR-3a for most types of music and at mid to lower volumes...the transition from the woofer to the dome midrange is better because of the smaller woofer. And, I find the AR-5 woofer to be tighter/faster sounding...the big 12" driver can get muddy, to my ears.

As for my 2a's...they are the earliest version, with the 10" woofer with cast aluminum frame, six mounting bolts, cloth surrounds, felt/foam damping rings and cylindrical alnico magnet. I like these woofers even more than those in the 5's.

I often run the 2a's and 5's together, sometimes with the 2a's running full range and the 5's running mids/tweets only. Very nice.

Guest105, Dec 3, 2013 #20

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbluesman

For their era, they were outstanding...and still hold up quite well today, but are not comparable to high-quality modern speakers.

I like my modern speakers.

Have had a few pairs and will have more.

Another pair on its way as we speak.

Having said that, AR3a is a pair of speakers that I will not get rid of.

They're not inferior. They're just different.

But I do see why some would think of them to be inferior.

Click to expand...

To be clear, I do not consider them to be inferior. I meant precisely what I said...that they cannot be compared to high-quality modern speakers. Well, of course they CAN...but it would not be fair to do so. For their era, they were very, very good...and certainly among the best. If one compared them to today's best - which to me is not a fair fight - they would not fare nearly so well. That's what I meant by "not comparable".

Appears that you feel about your 3a's the way I feel about many (too many) pairs of of older/vintage speakers which I own and use on a regular basis (KLH 5's, KLH 6's, Dynaco A25's, AR-2a's, AR-5's, AR-4x's, Jensen 700XL's, Advent 5002's, Boston A200's, etc etc etc).

Guest105, Dec 3, 2013 #22

shacky

Addicted Member

I have a pair of older version 2AX's and 3a's. Both recapped and the 3a's have Ohmites - need to do same to 2AX's.

So my 2AX's have the red-ish larger tweeters from the AR 3's. I like them a lot. Midrange is awesome to my ears but the woofer is handling up to ~ 1800 hz if I recall correctly on the older version. It is a speaker I could live happily with forever.

The 3a's just take things to another level. Dome midrange and that incredible woofer. The flood of bass just wins you over.

But the 2AX gets you 85-90% there and is easier to drive - an aspect that I think plays into the equation a lot :yes:

shacky, Dec 3, 2013 #23

davidro

Lunatic Member

kcbluesman said: ↑

Not sure what you mean then. Of course they can be compared and considered different, inferior, superior or otherwise. If you say it would not be fair to compare them together because it's not a fair fight and the 3a would not fare nearly well, the only implication would be the 3a is inferior I would have thought.

davidro, Dec 3, 2013 #24

Copa1934

My ears are bleeding

Subscriber

hionfi said: ↑

At HIONFI we're big fans of all AR speakers, they can fit the budget minded buyer or the collector. We're big fans of the 3A, please see the attached rehab work done on one of our pairs.

PS: Our LST-2's, 3's 3A's, 2AX's and 4ax's all get equal playing time in the store.

Own two pair of AR3a speakers, one set pre 70 and the latter post 70. I think they are one of the ugliest speakers around. However, restored the way Pabs did, well that changes things a little. And I am speaking of grill-less. My second set haven't been restored yet, so maybe I'll do some work with the baffle, maybe wood fill, sand, and nice flat finish. My biggest problem has been dragging my feet on the tweeter rebuild. I'd like to come up with a repeatable process (getting close) so I can salvage as many "dead" tweeters as I can. It's not about economics as I'm sure in the end this will cost more than HiVi replacements or other suitable replacements, but they'll be as close to original as I'll ever get them.

When our daughter and grandkids are out (again) I hope to spend more quality time with them (the speakers that is). Sure hope it's before I'm no longer able to.

Copa1934, Dec 3, 2013 #25

Guest105

Super Member

OK. They are inferior to many of today's high-end speakers as regard their abilities to accurately reproduce the full audible spectrum faithfully, demonstrate coherence between the drivers, and deliver detailed articulation.

Does that make them any less important, or less enjoyable? Of course not. And are they still able to outperform much of today's junk? Of course, especially when correctly restored.

Inferiority implies comparison. Is a Honda accord inferior compared to a Mercedes S-Class sedan? Most would say yes. But compared to its peers, the Honda is an exceptionally good vehicle. And because it is "inferior" to the S-class, does that mean it cannot be appreciated and enjoyed? Of course not.

Compared to its peers, the 3a was (is) an exceptionally good speaker. Compared to many good modern speakers, it lags behind them.

I have six systems set up in my home, and enjoy them all. In all but my "main" system, I use speakers from the 60's, 70's or 80's. Are they as accurate or as detailed as my main speakers? No. Do I enjoy them just as much? Yes.

Guest105, Dec 3, 2013 #26

davidro

Lunatic Member

kcbluesman said: ↑

Does that make them any less important, or less enjoyable? Of course not. And are they still able to outperform much of today's junk? Of course, especially when correctly restored.

Compared to its peers, the 3a was (is) an exceptionally good speaker. Compared to many good modern speakers, it lags behind them.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. You said that's not what you meant just then which confused me.

davidro, Dec 3, 2013 #27

Guest105

Super Member

I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I meant...that they not inferior in the sense that they are not worth owning or using, or in the sense that they are poorly made.

But thanks for making sure that we are all clear now. You forced me to make a comparison which I don't see as valid (and which I quite clearly described as not appropriate). But, to satisfy you, I did.

In fact, I will go a step further and change my position completely. No speaker is better or worse than another....they are all just different. The AR-3a, therefore, is no better than the 2ax. They are just different.

Guest105, Dec 3, 2013 #28

davidro

Lunatic Member

Geeez, whatever man.

davidro, Dec 3, 2013 #29

pabs911

Well-Known Member

Copa1934 said: ↑

When our daughter and grandkids are out (again) I hope to spend more quality time with them (the speakers that is). Sure hope it's before I'm no longer able to.

Yes, I agree that AR-3As are damned ugly sans grills, but I always played mine with them on. I'd love to see someone veneer the baffle on a nice pair (the later version with the wiring inside the cabinet). Unfortunately, the drivers are still basically ugly though.

pabs911, Dec 3, 2013 #30

RS Steve

Tube Junkie

Subscriber

pabs911 said: ↑

That's why I like the AR-11, much nicer looking in my opinion, and supposed to be the best sounding that AR made in that size.

I own the Heathkit version of the AR-3a, and have owned, and restored a pair of 2ax's. I believe a correct working pair of 2ax's sound very similar to the 3a's but just less bass and less power handling. If you listen to either model on a tube amp, you'll understand how the highs and mids are supposed to sound. I have a pair of the replacement tweeters by Vintage AR that I have used in my 3a's, they are a big improvement over the originals since with age the originals develop issues.

As far as picking one model over the other, it would be the AR-3a. Both are very power hungry, and amp selection would also be a factor.

저작자표시 비영리 변경금지

'스피커 > AR' 카테고리의 다른 글

AR3A 스피커 앰프 매칭기 (0)	2015.05.01
AR2 / AR2X, AR2A/ AR2AX 연보 (0)	2015.04.06
AR3a 매칭. 피셔 500TX 조합 ? 앰프매칭 (0)	2015.02.02
AR3A 스피커 시기별 구분 (0)	2015.02.01
AR3A vs AR2AX 어떤게 더 좋아요? - 해외포럼 (0)	2014.01.24
AR3A 적정가격 ? (0)	2013.02.19
AR3a 대체용 스피커? AR 58B , AR 11, AR915 정보 모으기.(비교) (0)	2012.04.06
ar3사용기(ar2a, 2ax와의 비교기) (0)	2012.04.04
AR4X (1965~73) 정보 모으기 (0)	2012.03.25
AR 스피커 거품? (AR3A / ar2ax / ar4 ) (0)	2012.03.18

AR3a vs AR2ax

'스피커 > AR' 카테고리의 다른 글

댓글

티스토리툴바