Poll: What do we want next?

[Chane M&C]

Not to jump the gun, but if you guys are putting A5s and A1bs into production, where does that leave the A4?

Right about where it was, which is next in line.

Does it mean the ETA for the A4 is delayed past April?

Well, it always was past April, but delayed is not too strong of a word for April, no. ;)

I was still holding out hope that the A4 might get incorporated into the first group buy as an alternative option (with some additional TBD cost) to the A1.

We didn't want to delay the A5 any longer with a development project for the A4. It was better to unkook the A4 from the A5 and then ask forgiveness for for it all later.

Just thinking out loud here: If A1s are better suited for rear channel than A1bs, and A1bs are taking over completely (and thus discontinuing the A1s) in April, then won't that leave a gap for the Arx product line? There will be owners who will have/will want either A5s, A3s, A2s or A1bs as front L/R and A2s as center; what will they do for surround rear/ surround side/ front width/height channels since A5s, A3s, A2s, and A1bs are not suited for that purpose?

An excellent point and one that we weighed in planning the A4's program. There will be a hole in the product line as the A1 goes away and the A4 comes onboard, but we felt this plan of action was best. The A4 is just going to take longer than folks are going to be willing to wait for the A5.

The A1b was already in the can, so to speak, and was simple and easy to slide in with the A5. Plus the A1b is going to continue to blaze a much broader and longer path already begun by the A1. The A4 is a cool item, but will be much more of a niche product.

[ryansboston]

I completely understand, those are all logical answers. I had previously thought that offering options would delay the A5s, so it definitely makes sense to unhook...

Thanks for the update and also the quick responses!

[Thegoatlantern]

Jon in your expert opinion will the A1b be suitable for rear surround work? Or will it be a bit of overkill? The reason I ask is that I hopefully fall into the second group buy and also planned on purchasing the A2 in one order, with the A4's to complete the 7.0 surround system. If the A1b is a bit overkill I think I might purchase the A1's before anything falls into place. Just trying to get your opinion on the matter

[Chane M&C]

Jon in your expert opinion will the A1b be suitable for rear surround work? Or will it be a bit of overkill?

I wouldn't say it's any more overkill than the A1, but the A1b will be more of a stand monitor than the A1, meaning you should use it no closer to major surfaces and boundaries than you would A1 (with its port plugged). The A1b's fundamental difference is extended bass, which can recommend against side or back channel use in tight spaces.

The reason I ask is that I hopefully fall into the second group buy and also planned on purchasing the A2 in one order, with the A4's to complete the 7.0 surround system. If the A1b is a bit overkill I think I might purchase the A1's before anything falls into place. Just trying to get your opinion on the matter

Folks should consider the placement foremost: out into the room and with the somewhat larger room, the A1b is slightly preferred. Closer to the side or back walls and the A1 gets the nod.

[Thegoatlantern]

Thanks Jon, I have ample room for placing these in my room, about 2 1/2 feet. Thanks for the quick reply. I must say having a direct line to consult with you is amazing and one of the biggest reasons I have decided to go with Arx. Keep up with the good work, and someone please give this man a raise! ;)

I wouldn't say it's any more overkill than the A1, but the A1b will be more of a stand monitor than the A1, meaning you should use it no closer to major surfaces and boundaries than you would A1 (with its port plugged). The A1b's fundamental difference is extended bass, which can recommend against side or back channel use in tight spaces.



Folks should consider the placement foremost: out into the room and with the somewhat larger room, the A1b is slightly preferred. Closer to the side or back walls and the A1 gets the nod.

[Aus10]

I'm not sure if someone can give John a raise as he is the owner of the company haha

Back on topic, I had another question for johns expert advice.

Jon I was thinking of doing 7.2 in my room, could I put the A1s as side speakers and see if I can join the A4 group buy (if there is one) and use those for rears?

Thank you, I'm not sure how well the A1s would do as side speakers.

[Thegoatlantern]

Nice Aus, I'm actually doing the same thing

[Aus10]

Nice Aus, I'm actually doing the same thing

Im doing it in a bedroom that is 11X13. Haha. I have been considering replacing my 1121K with a yamaha rx A3010.... Job starts soon! Lol

[D'Argo]

True. I noticed that the big box subs are not selling lately and there seems to be a trend going to smaller sealed subs (under 24" cube). There are also some developments exploring smaller drivers to the current product line, 15" or 12" vs. the 18" (smaller options than the big box subs). Just an observation on what I've read recently. There is also some activity on exploring amp alternatives, including those that can provide flat responses < 20 Hz or DSP/EQ capabilities (I guess to compromise for the smaller cabinet?).

Agreed. The single biggest challenge in home audio bass is acceptable box size. Go big and you can get great sound, but go small and you will be sacrificing something, somewhere. The physics aren't kind when you're really after deep, loud, tuneful bass.

[Chane M&C]

I was thinking of doing 7.2 in my room, could I put the A1s as side speakers and see if I can join the A4 group buy (if there is one) and use those for rears?

Hi Aus10. I'd think more about the A1 as rears (where you can move them around and experiment with placement) and the A4 as sides. The A4 will be dedicated onwall models which will usually help in a side fill application.

[Chane M&C]

True. I noticed that the big box subs are not selling lately and there seems to be a trend going to smaller sealed subs (under 24" cube). There are also some developments exploring smaller drivers to the current product line, 15" or 12" vs. the 18" (smaller options than the big box subs). Just an observation on what I've read recently. There is also some activity on exploring amp alternatives, including those that can provide flat responses < 20 Hz or DSP/EQ capabilities (I guess to compromise for the smaller cabinet?).

Summing this up, nearly any system can be electronically equalized to go to nearly any depth, provided we don't factor in distortion and are willing to limit ourselves in just how hard we dare push a small piston. And I like the idea of external amplifiers. Lots of benefits.

On a related topic, the thinking that due to lessened group delay sealed subs sound better then ported is incomplete. Any sealed sub you EQ to mimic the response of a ported design, all other things being roughly equal, will have similar effects throughout its response. Whether we reach our goal acoustically or electronically we get the same net result across all domains.

Actually the ported system will have lower distortion too, that owing to the added "free" low frequency output and lowered cone motion, at least down to system resonance. It's interesting how consistent the principle of there being no free lunches is. ;)

[D'Argo]

Jon, can the A4 serve as front height speakers as well? Or are the A1s more suited?

Hi Aus10. I'd think more about the A1 as rears (where you can move them around and experiment with placement) and the A4 as sides. The A4 will be dedicated onwall models which will usually help in a side fill application.

[Chane M&C]

Jon, can the A4 serve as front height speakers as well? Or are the A1s more suited?

The A4 are aimed at affordable, compact, and relatively high output (for a 5" woofered system) effects channel use. Anywhere the A1/A1b can succeed, the A4 can, just flat against the wall instead of out into the room. I think a wide surround setup using A4 for all effects channels in a fair sized room could be spectacular...

[K-Dubb]

True. I noticed that the big box subs are not selling lately and there seems to be a trend going to smaller sealed subs (under 24" cube). There are also some developments exploring smaller drivers to the current product line, 15" or 12" vs. the 18" (smaller options than the big box subs). Just an observation on what I've read recently. There is also some activity on exploring amp alternatives, including those that can provide flat responses < 20 Hz or DSP/EQ capabilities (I guess to compromise for the smaller cabinet?).

I wound up ordering a JTR Captivator S. It is a single sealed 18 with a 2400watt amp. The box is fairly small too. I think it will work with the A5s nicely.

[D'Argo]

Jon, I guess the Arx Subs will be ported for efficiency and the approach is to achieve extention accoustically vs. electronically (eq)?

I also read a comment in one of the posts regarding current ported subs being tuned too high (15 Hz or 20 Hz)? And with the ported option subsonic/LFEs are lost (vs. sealed)? Some also complain about port noise. Is it possible to tune the port lower than 15 Hz (not sure if that will require a larger port size/port noise effects)?

One post also had a comment that sealed subs have more midbass "punch." Is it correct to assume that the A5's SplitGap midwoofers will take care of the midbass "punch" while the Arx Sub can take care of the lower bass frequencies (extension)? Will a higher distortion also matter for the lower frequencies since these frequencies are more "felt" than "heard?"

Sorry for the numerous questions.

Summing this up, nearly any system can be electronically equalized to go to nearly any depth, provided we don't factor in distortion and are willing to limit ourselves in just how hard we dare push a small piston. And I like the idea of external amplifiers. Lots of benefits.

On a related topic, the thinking that due to lessened group delay sealed subs sound better then ported is incomplete. Any sealed sub you EQ to mimic the response of a ported design, all other things being roughly equal, will have similar effects throughout its response. Whether we reach our goal acoustically or electronically we get the same net result across all domains.

Actually the ported system will have lower distortion too, that owing to the added "free" low frequency output and lowered cone motion, at least down to system resonance. It's interesting how consistent the principle of there being no free lunches is. ;)