Clean Bass, reasonable size.

Require adequate power to sound good, slight weakness in transient response compared to modern hight end speakers.

I was prompted to write this review upon reading Sean Haven's comments regarding imaging. My Rec III's have been worked on in just such a manner, taking out one leg of the stock tweeter/supertweeter pair and using instead the Phillips/Norelco soft dome supertweeter (25wRMS rating!) of about 1975. This work was done by the original owner, along with the replacement of one midrange (original driver by McGee, replacement is 5" Phillips/Norelco) when enthusiastic playing of his home-built theater organ blew it.

In order to finance proper theater organ speaker construction, the Rec IIIs were repaired, upgraded and sold to me. My pair has been tested in Penn State's anecholic chamber, and with the new tweeters were better than +- 3db from 40Hz to 18Khz. Yes, Sean, Imaging is improved.

I've had these speakers since 1975, and find that they compare well to modern speakers in the $800 per speaker range. That's why I've never traded up, as $800 each gets me equal sound, noticably better sound is upwards of $2500 per pair.

My ratings below reflect the reasonable price of these speakrs.

Regarding power requirements, I drove them for years on 70 w RMS per channel, but have had other amps pushing them. They sound fine at 70 watts RMS on a transistor amp. Sounded better with Dynaco Mark III 60 watt tube amps and Tiger 125 watt mono transistor amps. Currently they sound great with a Sansui 240 RMS per channel vintage integrated amp pusing them.

Similar Products Used:

AR3AX, IMF, custom built

Unbelievable sound quality through-out the entire range. Powerful Base. Strong Highs. Beautiful mid voices.

None

This set of speakers was handed down to my family as a legacy. These speakers were originally purchased in the early 70s and I received them around 7 years ago and have enjoyed them ever since. I originally was driving them with an Onkyo receiver @ 40wpc. This produced good sound, however I recently upgrade my reveiver to a Yamaha RX-V595a and WOW! what a difference. These things ROCK!!!! Its a good thing its winter and the windows are closed or I am sure the neighbors would be complaining. All of my CD's sound better now that I am driving them with 70wpc. The base in Creed's "my own prison" and the base and voice in Sarah McLachlan's Surfacing are just awesome. I can't say enough good things about these old speaker except that there are few (if any) speakers built today that can touch them.

Similar Products Used:

Bose 901s, 301s, 201, Many other.

Strong low bass. These speakers deliver the raw unrelenting bass notes that meets up to todays CD audio standards. These have been passed down in the family since they were new. I Love to impress my freinds with these things and will never get rid of them. Even Chemical Brothers won't push the limits of low end capabilities of these speakers.

The imaging could be better. I am almost considering replacing the tweaters with one dome tweeter each to improve the sound stage. Requires alot of amplifier power to drive.

I once had an old "Stereo Review" magazine that reviewed these speakers. The reported frequency range was 20hz~16khz.
Lacking in the high range (by todays standards) but definatly can drop down to those low base notes. This artical also listed the CrosOver frequencies. I cant remember what they were. I believe the woofer was choked at 220hz (much like todays sub woofers) I've had to replace the crossovers in both cabinets and I am shure the frequencies are wrong. If anyone can tell me the specs on the Xover it would be appreciated. I really want to restore them to thier origonal specs. if not better.

Similar Products Used:

Cerwin Vegas