AR 3 Speakers

Stringreen, following your comment, I could try the AR3a speakers with the Proceed HPA-2 amp, 500 watts per channel into 4 ohms. I've heard them only with the Marantz Model 18, 40 watts per channel into 4 ohms. Might be an interesting experience. IIRC, the pots are a bit discontinuous.

db

My original pair of AR3a speakers are sitting on the floor of my closet. From time to time, I imagine having the Marantz 18 and AR table I used with them checked out to create a vintage setup, but I'm unlikely to do it. Nevertheless, I'll hang onto these icons of my youth because I'm basically a pack rat.

db

How silly the above two posts are. Of course, you don't slam speakers with the maximum power available. The speakers these amps are used with now are much more efficient than ARs.

db

The relationship is power needed to achieve a given SPL, and it isn't usually very much for practical listening levels. What gives AR speakers their LF capability is the large excursion the diaphragm can make. I recall a debate between Paul Klipsch and Edgar Villchur at an Acoustical Society meeting in which Klipsch said something to the effect he didn't care if you push it (the diaphragm) with a broom handle you still have to move the air. IME, well designed powerful amps do a superior job of controlling diaphragm excursions.

Onhyw61, the AR3a speakers have been sitting in my closet for years and are likely to remain there. I use the 400 watt/channel amps with a pair of KEF 107/2 mains and a pair of 102 surrounds, speakers much more efficient than the ARs. The danger you envision could happen I suppose if a noise were sent over the system inadvertently, from a short, for example, but not by listening at the levels most folks use. I can't imagine using anywhere near 100 watts into an AR. I never cranked the 40 watts/channel Marantz 18 anywhere near its peak even in the days of playing Let It Bleed while smoking a substance common on college campuses at the time.

db