advertisement


differences between Exposure 4DR2 <-> 18 mono

fred sonnen

fred sonnen

pfm Member
I know that 18 mono is 2 two box mono solution.
I know that 18 mono has a 250VA transformer per channel 4DR has 300VA
I could see at Flickr the reg.boards are the same. even the components are the same.
so where is the different between 4DR and 18 mono.
I found no pictures showing the amplifier boards.

btw.: what is the diff. between 4DR and 4DR2?

------------
regards
f.s.
 
I've owned both a 4DR (and 4 Dual non-reg) and the Super 18 mono's and, surprisingly, actually preferred the mono's in my system.
 
The 4DR has a bigger sound much wider soundstage and open sounding with taut bass.
The monos are close and very musical with good prat. But in my opinion the 4dr is more transparent and better with speakers with lower sensitivities or more difficult to drive
 
The XVI had two 500VA transformers (one per rail) per SIDE. Simply wonderful. Wish I had not sold mine.
 
rontoolsie said:
The XVI had two 500VA transformers (one per rail) per SIDE. Simply wonderful. Wish I had not sold mine.
Click to expand...

Theo (of this parish) has a quartet of these, and when switching them on has to wait between each one so as not to trip the consumer unit in his house. :D

Re selling yours, I'd no doubt feel the same way. Every Exposure amp I owned (and I've had a few) was a gem in its own right.

The only slight disappointment - after waiting years to own it - was the IX/XIV/IVDR2. It didn't live up to the (very) high expectations I had of it.
 
Way back in the day when I was looking for a 4dr I was told by Exposure to try and get a Mk2 version if possible.
Mk1 had the rounded front panel and big yellow decals. Phono input only. Twin 300 VA transformers. 80Watts/ 8 ohms.
The mk2 ( 4dr2) had rectangular front panel , smaller decals , twin 375 VA transformers and phono + xlr ( not balanced ) inputs. Bi wire outputs.90 Watts/8 ohms.

Always found it hard to get the 4dr2 to sound to my liking. A big , warmish , dark sound. More spacious ( ?), Subjectively slower ( than 18 super monos). Just not quite enough pep and mid slam. Some would prefer this presentation of course. I sold it and kept the 18 super monos. More my preference.
When Exposure rationalised the product range about 2000, they ditched the 4dr2 and kept the 18 supers in the range.
I always fancied a go of the 16 Dual phase monos and did get a dem many years ago now. Really too heavy. 30 Kg each. My lightweight rack ( old quadraspire on castors - I know ,I know !) couldnt take this. I ended up with a more compact solution. DV HX1.2mk1.
 
mbu said:
...

Always found it hard to get the 4dr2 to sound to my liking. A big , warmish , dark sound. More spacious ( ?), Subjectively slower ( than 18 super monos).
Click to expand...

That's interesting because Tony / Exposure said that "the power transistors [of the 4dr] are much faster than those of the 18 "

----------------
regards
f.s.
 
Im sure they had the same power trannies ( 18 range and 4DR2). Id almost be confident enough to bet money on it.
However , if Tony has stated they were different. Who am I to disagree.
Perhaps the heavier bass balance of the 4dr2 gave a subjective impression of being slower. Darker. More power fore sure.
The 4dr2 was more expensive than the 18 monos at the time. £2200 and £1800 respectively. Approx'.
 
Another newer Exposure power amp combo to maybe check out would be the current 3010s2 monos.If your not committed to getting the vintage gear.
Never hear much about them though. A local dealer was selling a black ex dem pair couple of years back. Sort of wish I'd bought them at the time. Just to try.
100Watts/8 ohms. Looked nice.
 
mbu said:
Another newer Exposure power amp combo to maybe check out would be the current 3010s2 monos.....
Click to expand...

Thanks MBU for the hint. I think the 2/3010s2 stuff seams to be the first post farlow serie witch is really good. but at the end of the day they are to expensive ( for me).

__________
regards
f.s.
 
The only slight disappointment - after waiting years to own it - was the IX/XIV/IVDR2. It didn't live up to the (very) high expectations I had of it.


That's interesting because i have now owned all the combinations (not the XVI monos) and have found the IX/IVDR2/XIV to be by far the best combo for my taste.I don't if other people have found this but the sound has got better over time (or are my ears deteriorating?). In my humble opinion whatever Farlowe era kit you use if going to be excellent
paul
 
In my humble opinion whatever Farlowe era kit you use if going to be excellent paul[/QUOTE said:
Agreed. All inherently good sounding gear. Pretty reliable and robust too. Rest down to personal preferences , room , partnering equipment etc ,etc.
Click to expand...
 
Theo's not the only one with a quartet of XVIs. I haven't tripped the consumer unit in the house switching mine on, though I'm quite careful as I'd heard about this one.

I must confess that I can't tell any difference between one pair and two in my room & system. Heresy I know, but there you go. The four of them do look nice in the custom rack though!

D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top