Announcing the New Arx A1b, arriving the first week in August 2012!

[Chane M&C]

Hi folks,

Without further ado, TAI presents the first studio proofs of the new Arx A1b, currently on the water with the new Arx A5 and due the first week in August.



The A1b is a larger, upgraded version of the very successful A1, and includes improved midrange resolution and a much more extended bass register. We suspect the A1b will redefine the value equation for economical performance monitors engineered with premium components and extensive tuning.

We hope you enjoy them as much as we have preparing then and bringing them to you.

Final photos, we're told, should be here July 17th, and will include the Arx A5. One step closer!

[gtpsuper24]

Looks great! Since they are in a larger cabinet will the woofers have more output and/or better sensitivity? Can't wait to pick up a pair, just ordered a set of A2 yesterday, just one step closer to a 9 channel Arx system.

[BufordTJustice]

Looks great! Since they are in a larger cabinet will the woofers have more output and/or better sensitivity? Can't wait to pick up a pair, just ordered a set of A2 yesterday, just one step closer to a 9 channel Arx system.

They are going to be slightly more efficient, with better impulse response. They are also tuned lower than the original A1's. They'll be able to take advantage of the Arx midwoofer's impressive (linear) x-max much more efficiently now.

These will shock people.

[Chane M&C]

Looks great! Since they are in a larger cabinet will the woofers have more output and/or better sensitivity? Can't wait to pick up a pair, just ordered a set of A2 yesterday, just one step closer to a 9 channel Arx system.

Buford has it right: They're redesigned for a lot more bass extension and in so doing, a more linear midrange. I'm personally really looking forward to the reaction these cause when they hit. In my view they're just the high performance everyman's system for our interesting economic times: About twice the output of anything not using SplitGap in their class at a fraction of the price, plus they have the excellent planar tweeter. If you don't "need" the fancy enclosure, these may bear looking into.

[D'Argo]

They are going to be slightly more efficient, with better impulse response. They are also tuned lower than the original A1's. They'll be able to take advantage of the Arx midwoofer's impressive (linear) x-max much more efficiently now.

These will shock people.

Buford, did you also participate or contribute in the design/redesign of the A1b? :cool:

[BufordTJustice]

Buford, did you also participate or contribute in the design/redesign of the A1b? :cool:

Negative. I have known about them since just after they were a glint in Jon's eye, but I had no hand in their development. They're all Jon (and his genius). :D

[jnordi]

Negative. I have known about them since just after they were a glint in Jon's eye, but I had no hand in their development. They're all Jon (and his genius). :D

Buford, what are your thoughts of five (or seven) A1b's in a 5-7.2 setup with a room size of 14'W X 23'L X 8'H ?
Thanks Jeff

[BufordTJustice]

Buford, what are your thoughts of five (or seven) A1b's in a 5-7.2 setup with a room size of 14'W X 23'L X 8'H ?
Thanks Jeff

Well, I haven't heard them yet, so I can't comment from first-hand experience. I can say that they should work quite well....being able to serve even as mains in all but large rooms.

You'll certainly want to include a subwoofer, like the new one from one of the founders of SVS. Can't remember the name off the top of my head; it was announced on A-holics blog though. They look promising.

As for the A1b's, I would imagine a lower-than-80hz x-over setting would best allow you to take advantage of the XBL2/splitgap motors. Maybe something like 60hz? Anyways, I'm rambling now.

[Chane M&C]

Buford, what are your thoughts of five (or seven) A1b's in a 5-7.2 setup with a room size of 14'W X 23'L X 8'H ?
Thanks Jeff

I'm not Buford but I think it'd be sensaround. ;) And loud for the space used and dollars spent.

[jnordi]

Well, I haven't heard them yet, so I can't comment from first-hand experience. I can say that they should work quite well....being able to serve even as mains in all but large rooms.

You'll certainly want to include a subwoofer, like the new one from one of the founders of SVS. Can't remember the name off the top of my head; it was announced on A-holics blog though. They look promising.

As for the A1b's, I would imagine a lower-than-80hz x-over setting would best allow you to take advantage of the XBL2/splitgap motors. Maybe something like 60hz? Anyways, I'm rambling now.

Col, thanks for the reply, the sub company you are referring to is Power Sound Audio (PSA). I have two Epik subs now so I have the lower end covered, I just have a kind of fetish for high output monitors and I like the looks of the A1b.

http://www.powersoundaudio.com/ Link for the previous SVS designers.....

[D'Argo]

Negative. I have known about them since just after they were a glint in Jon's eye, but I had no hand in their development. They're all Jon (and his genius). :D

Thank you, Buford. No doubt about Jon and his genius. I was just curious if you had the opportunity to give them a listen. Anyway, you already answered in a prior post but thanks anyway.

[jnordi]

I'm not Buford but I think it'd be sensaround. ;) And loud for the space used and dollars spent.

Thanks Jon, my intention is to get 3 A1b's as soon as they are available and use them in a 3.2 HT setup and a stereo music only setup. This will give an idea of what to expect from the ARX line as I have not heard any ARX speakers. If I like what I'm hearing from the A1b's which I can get without being on the group buy list I will wait and order the A5's when available for all to purchase.
Jon do you have any measurement plots that you can post of the A5's and if possible a Xover pic? The reason I ask is that I have left some comments over at Audioholic's forum which I have been a member for several years about the new A5 and there seems to be a lot of interest generated with my posts, I get the naysayers who ask are there any measurements posted and I can't answer that. Thanks again
Thanks, Jeff

[Chane M&C]

Thanks Jon, my intention is to get 3 A1b's as soon as they are available and use them in a 3.2 HT setup and a stereo music only setup. This will give an idea of what to expect from the ARX line as I have not heard any ARX speakers. If I like what I'm hearing from the A1b's which I can get without being on the group buy list I will wait and order the A5's when available for all to purchase.

A smart plan. I'll second it.

Jon do you have any measurement plots that you can post of the A5's and if possible a Xover pic?

We do have measured data, of course, but we've yet to decide if we want to go that direction or not. I'll go into why in a moment.

We do not publish crossover shots, although for no particular reason. The A5 crossover is a rather massive affair and is built not unlike our Custom channel product's crossovers are. The A5 crossover comprises eleven elements (which for a true 3-way is rather mimimal, and which is important to our philosophy) and uses truly high-grade components like very heavy ga inductors, premium film capacitors, and NI resistors.

The reason I ask is that I have left some comments over at Audioholic's forum which I have been a member for several years about the new A5 and there seems to be a lot of interest generated with my posts, I get the naysayers who ask are there any measurements posted and I can't answer that. Thanks again
Thanks, Jeff

I'm not surprised. I read some of the posts there, and combined with the previous treatment Arx, TAI, a fellow Arx enthusiast, and ultimately I were subject to, I'm not inclined to bend too terribly far over backwards to try and counter them - the minute you do try and counter them something else comes up to challenge the subject and frankly, we've probably all got better things to do with our time (witness the last time this happened).

Let me explain: From time to time folks approach us about measurements. My reply is always something along the lines of that 1) if we're going to be "sold" on measurements, then we've missed our messaging: I want us to sell based on user experience, satisfaction, a love of music and film, and the word of mouth that creates a positive community. If we're presumed to be illigitimate because we don't do something nine-tenths of the industry already does not do too, we'll fail to be motivated.

2) Measurements, while absolutely essential to design, testing, and QC work, pertain little to your listening experience, in your home, using your sources, on your gear. Some of them are certainly more useful than others, but the way TAI designs and produces loudspeakers just isn't served by leading customer relations with measurements. It's served by what we do with them here, and that is what makes us different. (And I'll probably never tell anybody directly what that method and standard are. It's a trade secret, such as it is.)

I have this conversation with our associates all the time (most of them share my 30 years experience doing audio) and we typically end the conversation with another experienced anecdote about what I've pointed out, which is that you can only hear a device. You cannot hear a measurement.

Again, measurements are crucial. They are indispensible. They form and inform the entire chain of design and they've deep-sixed plenty of potential designs too, so essential are they. They just don't stand in for ears-on and I have decided, for now, not to play a defensive game where TAI has to be assumed to be less than legitimate in an industry that, unless they use them as sales aids, more or less thinks about published measurements what I've laid out here.

We have little cause to publish something that hasn't much to do with why our stuff is so universally well regarded for sound quality as it is. We have less cause to do so to defend a faulty presupposition. Ornery, I guess.

When I see comments about "how to sell speakers" it only cements doubt. Sure TAI wants to sell speakers, just not at the expense of user experience and expending lots of time coming from an already challenged position, a position we didn't create and that's quite unproductive. Read carefully out there and you'll find Arx and Dana and other of our creations consistently making things interesting for the usual product suspects.

Among the first few things that probably happens when TAI publishes an A5 graph is that someone else publishes something else and calls us dishonest. Meh. (Conversely, I've seen industry members who use measurements obsessively threaten folks who find their stuff measures differently. You can't win. Judging a loudspeaker by measurement is like calibrating a baseball glove: They're too organic - too analog - for that. Just go use them.)

So. We may very well publish measurements but we're not terribly interested in or concerned by having to publish a rarity just to be legitimate, while such plots and graphs have so little to do with what you're about to hear. Consider too that the A5, for example, is flat to within just over 2dB across its stated bandwidth...but you can measure it way outside of that parameter depending on how you measure it, what you drive it with, at what angle at what you measure it, and at what distance. It's a tall stack of components and you can make it and any other stack of components measure oddly if you want to. Another reason why you have to know how to, when to, and when not to measure.

Oh, and the A5 is specifically designed for specific behaviors at both crossover points. It wasn't just lashed together.

My suggestion to A5 lookers - or any speaker buyers of any brand and model - is that they do not purchase the product if they insist the decision be informed by either a line on paper or the presumption that without them the brand is hustling them.

So ends the TAI "lecture" on measurements. :)

[gtpsuper24]

Thanks Jon for the informative post.

Its fun to discuss on the boards loudspeaker designs and measurements, but its never impacted my purchase discions. But its much more fun to listen and enjoy the speakers than rant on and on in the forums.

Theres no measurements available for the Arx speakers but thats not going to stop me from enjoying my soon to be 9 channel Arx system. Not set on it yet but looks like in a few months get a set of A5s mains, A2 will be center, A1s for front heights and four A2s for surrounds.

[BufordTJustice]

I concur with Jon. I spent a decade (ten years) in professional live audio.

I have the utmost respect for Gene and Clint over at the Audioholics blog; I read it daily. However, there are some moderators at their forum who apply differing levels of scrutiny to different speakers, depending on which brand they have plastered on their grill. I was the target of this vitriol at their forums. They demanded that I or Jon publish every technical aspect of the A5's as they were at that time (very nearly complete). They had not asked this of ANY other speaker manufacturer of meaningful size up until that point, nor have they demanded this information from anybody since 'the incident'. I don't have the technical instrumentation to perform the measurements they demanded and Jon declined to provide them, feeling the demand to be quite one-sided (I agreed). Jon and I were banned forever. The moderators promptly deleted the entire (13 page) thread from their active forums and they took care to purge it from their archives as well.

AVS has been much more productive for technical discussion and they have developed quite an animosity for the forums at Audioholics. I can't blame them.

As for measurements, Jon hit the nail on the head. They are vital to proper loudspeaker design. NO question about it.

However, we simply cannot measure and quantify everything associated with the "loudspeaker experience" (how our ears perceive sound from a loudspeaker, or even a single sound source) at this stage in the game. If we could, I think it's safe to say that Yamaha, Midas, Digidesign, etc would all rather have a robot behind their $250K sound consoles who could mix every live show 'perfectly' and without variance. But, the truth right now is, we cannot measure everything. Hell, our industry can't even agree on the same measurement standards for speaker frequency response (smoothing? no smoothing? etc.) or for amplifier wattage output. In ten or twenty years, I have little doubt that we will be approaching the threshold of being able to truly quantify and measure sound almost exactly as our ears "hear it, we just cannot do it now.

Further, the benchracing that has been so popular over at Audioholics forums has amounted to little more than a bunch of 12 year old boys debating what "sex" feels like.......with people delivering full 'opinions' of loudspeakers that they have never even heard or seen in person. It is beginning to border on the absurd at the forums over there. I respectfully submit that one cannot 'know' what sex truly feels like it until they've actually participated in the act. One cannot know what a speaker sounds like by graphs any more than a man can know the company of a woman by watching porn. I apologize for the vulgar analogies, but they're the best I can think of.

I'm not angry at Gene, Clint, or any of the non-participatory moderators or members at Audioholics forums. I wish them the best.

I can also say that, if this benchracing weren't bordering on a religious cult by some members there and elsewhere, Jon would have released numbers and measurements long ago. Bottom line is that Jon wants people to listen to the speakers he crafts. He doesn't just model a crossover, slap a mic in front of it, and listen for a few hours..... he models, slaps a mic in front of it....and then really listens...for HOURS and HOURS...with all kinds of source content and source equipment ...swapping crossover components to search for finer improvements in sound. Across many genre's of music. He puts a lot more time into listening than measuring. I can teach a monkey to RTA a room (I did at several different points in my pro audio career, haha). I can't necessarily teach one of those same 'monkeys' to mix an 8-person A ccapella group.

Properly voicing a loudspeaker is an odrer of magnitude more difficult than simply measuring one with current available technologies. Both are important, but they are not equally difficult.