snell a II

I have Snell Type A/II loudspeakers in walnut. These are large, beautifully designed and crafted speakers, which will work in a moderately sized room. I expect delivery of a new pair of Von Schweikert VR-4 SE speakers in a few days. I hope not to be disappointed, but one respected afficionado told me that no new speaker under $5K will match the Snells, notwithstanding the fact they are 20 years old. I had the woofer surrounds replaced recently, which fully restored the bass response.

These are a three way design with a downward firing 10 inch woofer, 4.5" mid range and 1 inch soft dome tweeter. They were made in specific left and right pairs. As Znak noted, they are designed to be placed near the wall behind them -- just 7 to 12 inches, according to the factory manual. I've found that 15 inches gives the smoothest bass response, while adding depth to the soundstage. They can be spread ten feet apart and still maintain precise imaging. The main weaknesses are shallow soundstage depth and confusion (lack of cohesion) with orchestral works. While you can improve depth by moving them well away from the rear wall, the lower bass drops off precipitously. They are superb reproducers of vocals and small jazz ensembles -- Diana Krall, Eva Cassidy, Diana Reeves, Rod Stewart are just simply there on properly mastered tracks.

I'm presently running a Bryston 14B SST (600 WPC) which works very well. However, my old Bryston 4B (250 WPC) was certainly adequate. The newest Bryston 4B SST would be a good choice. These are 4 ohm speakers and require good power and high current -- I wouldn't try anything less than 150 WPC (Snell recommended 100-200 watts).

If the VR-4 SE works out, I may offer my Snell's here on Audiogon.

thank you guys! One other question: is there a difference between the A II and the A III (the latest version?) and what ist the price target for a good used AII ?

I never heard the AIII but I know it was taller than the AII and used a 12" woofer insteadof a 10" one. I think it also had a back-firing extra tweeter with controls. Otherwise, it looked the same and had the reputation of being very good, although opinions varied on whether the AIII or the AIIIi (the later model) was better. I know Art Dudley in an article in Lstener a few years ago said that the AIII was preferable to the AIIIi.

by friends AIII had external electronic crossover I know. For biamp capabilities

As said earlier in thread the woofer surrounds are a weak point because they're made of foam which breaks after 20 years.I have repaired mine with a thin rubber surround and this works very well.Do not use the thicker rubber,the suspension will be too stiff.
The overall response can be improved with an amp that is able to control the bass well.Otherwise it will sound too thick and too slow.I (still) use a Levinson 23 amp which works well.
Further,the internal cables that were standard in the speakers are (by far)not good enough.I have changed mine (about 10 years ago)for vanden Hul SCS cables.The improvement is big,but change the cable to the bass unit too or it will sound slightly discontinous..not as much as the Martin Logan Sequel though.
You could buy even better cables nowadays (Cardas,MIT,etc)
And then there is the crossover,it consists of many capacitors of inferior quality.You could cange these for better ones (i used Chateauroux,but there are more good ones)