pink fish media

Go Back   pink fish media > discussion > audio

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 06-08-10, 04:54 PM
Stoke Stoke is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 34
Exposure decision

Im choosing between an exposure XXV integrated and a dual IV amp/exposure3 pre.

I have no experience of any of these and wont be able to make an audition.
Would be greatful if anyone with experience could guide me in my decision.

My speakers are Epos ES14.

Many thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-08-10, 12:46 AM
per flemming per flemming is offline
Trade.
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,270
The dual IV anyday

Match it with a more recent preamp if possible, say XVII or XIX maybe XXI - never heard the III pre
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-08-10, 12:57 AM
Gromit Gromit is online now
Buffet-blower
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,243
Is the Dual IV really a 'Dual' IV? Only reason I ask is that I wasn't aware that the Dual ever came with a power-out socket to run the pre-amp, as the Single IV did. Would make a difference to its sale value certainly. If it's a Dual it will have it stated on the rear of the amp...and of course it'll have the dual H&F transformers inside.

Are there any photos of the innards of the IV?

Out of the two rigs you mention, I'd take the III/IV.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-08-10, 04:33 AM
Theo Theo is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,084
Gromit is right: I'd certainly ask for clarification of Dual status from the seller. The pre (and power, if it's the same vintage) will be 30 years old, and would benefit from a service. If you speak to Tony Brady at Exposure, he can give you an idea of what would be required.

That pairing, newly serviced/recapped, should be a far better amp (especially with the ES14s) than the XXV (good though the XXV is)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-08-10, 04:58 AM
per flemming per flemming is offline
Trade.
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,270
I remember the original IV as beeing somewhat loose flabby in bas department and doubt ES14 would benefit much.

A IVDR is another fish and certainly priced accordingly.

Anyway I would consider the integrated too if that pricing is ok.
Not everyday such a fine amplifier available.
As I recall its a more recent remote version of the classic XX.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-08-10, 07:25 AM
cliffyboy cliffyboy is offline
Exposure Fan
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 654
Hi guys, cant beleive I have not yet added a comment so here goes.

I must agree that the III/IV on sale on ebay, I beleive to be a single IV, not a dual, having owned a huge number fo Exposure goodies, whihc many members will vouch for, I can with a great degree of certainty, confirm that I think it is a single IV, as I have never seen a IV dual that supplies a feed to a pre amp.

I do however know a proper IV dual for sale and have pics to send to you if you like. It is in mint condition and having known the seller for 6 years roughly can confirm that it is a marvlous item.

Furthermorem being an owner of EPOS 14 (yes they finally arrived), they work seeminglessly well with the Exposure Amps, especially a dual IV upwards.

Feel free to e-mail me at cliff@markbeaumont.com so that I can send you pics of the IV in its full glory.

Re: the III, I have only heard this once and would agree that wiht a unit so old, it would have to be serviced by Tony at Exposure. I would not say it is the best pre amp out of teh Exposure Range and would at least go for a VII Dual, XI or even the later models as mentioned above, XVII, XXI, XXIII, etc etc.

I owned a dual IV unregulated and regulated and would say that the Regulated, even thought at the time I did not agree, trounces the Un regulated (usually found in a biscuit tin style case i.e. rounded, rather than sqaure fronted)

I have seom Exposure literature I can also send you.

X, XV are the only two intergrated amps I would advise, not having heard the newer ranges, I am unable to comment.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-08-10, 07:58 AM
cjarchez cjarchez is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 346
I have also had a lot of Exposure through my hands and retailed it during the Farlowe days.

I agree that any of the pre/power combos will out perform any of the integrateds. At the time, IMHO and at the price, Exposure pre/powers were without equal. I was never so sure of their integrateds, although up there with the best (price point again) I personally felt others were a tad more pleasing to my ears. e.g. To me an Inca Tech Claymore puts a nose ahead of a X or XV. I've always fancied an IT pre/power but they are rarer than hens teeth, though early Magnums had the same designer.....

I have seen a s/h Dual IV with a power out for a preamp but I did not know if that was factory spec. or modified. If you can't get an internal photo, just the serial number and a 'phone call to Exposure should clarify things. The Dual Regulated IV most certainly does not have a power out and most certainly is clearly the best version of the IV. That power out is handy until you can track down an outbord PSU (VI, IX, XII) which will be a very worthwhile upgrade.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-08-10, 10:01 AM
1000RPM 1000RPM is online now
pfm Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,323
Mr Stoke

A happy compromise might be a VI / VII / VIII - not as full-on as a Dual IV, but better and more adaptable that an integrated.

I use mine with Epos 11s and Epos 14s. sounds great.

I mention this as I may be parting with a my VI / VII / VIII, which would offer you a cheaper alternative to ebay. Anyway, I'll shut up now as this is 'audio' not 'classifieds'.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-08-10, 02:35 AM
Stoke Stoke is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 34
Thank you guys. Thats a lot of help for me.

Wow, thats very generous of you Cliffy. You dont happen to know someone with a IVDR aswell? Ill keep in touch.

1000rpm, i am previosly running that system at home. We are in the same situation.

Again most thankful for your help guys
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-08-10, 05:47 AM
Ben&Ted Ben&Ted is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 31
From experience I would avoid the very early IV's (any)they sounded poor in comparison to even a late model VIIIs or XVIIIs ( the solid aluminium front panel facelift versions are very good examples to look out for of the VIIIs and XVIIIs).

The IV's produced from the period when the true IV DUAL REG was in production are the best to look for; these include the single IV with or without the single pre-reg psu for a pre amp. about 1988 onwards.(confirmation required on date)

The III pre amp is not much cop and is trounced by a dual VII with matched VI's psu or XII psu ( an IX psu powered VII dual is very impressive).

The III is only worth it for curiosity or for completist collection.

On a budget I would look for a VII dual, 2x VI psu and VIIIs.

If you can find a XII psu instead of the 2x VI spu even better.

Next an XI pre would be better than the VII dual.

XVIIIs or a post @1988 IV single power would be a top line replacement for the VIIIs .

Best of luck in your search, good Exposure amps have few competitors that better them.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-08-10, 07:06 AM
Stoke Stoke is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 34
Thanks Ben, thats also very helpful.

Regards
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-08-10, 09:59 AM
Gromit Gromit is online now
Buffet-blower
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,243
Very good post from B&T, which I concur with from my own experiences. I have also been quite shocked (or rather pleasantly surprised) how close the XXI/Super XVIII mono's run my previous IX/XIV/IVDR. In fact there are some aspects that I actually prefer the XXI/XVIII's - perhaps giving even more credence to the rumour(?) that JF himself always liked the XXI pre so much, reckoning it was the finest pre-amp he made.

I'd also agree a well looked-after DualVII/2xVI/VIII is a very nice combination - well-balanced and extremely adaptable.

I've also in the past run an XI with both a single XII, a pair of XII's and a IX. The XI is a very good pre when its fire is stoked by a IX.

A friend of mine runs an XI/2xXII/Super VIII and it's great - and looks good too as all the boxes are the same size.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-08-10, 05:23 AM
macapaca macapaca is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 14
Hi, I am running an Exposure III with a VI PSU and a Dual IV (unregulated).
I cannot recommend this set up highly enough. It is a remarkable sound which is powerful and effortless. I run some Dali Ikon 1 speakers which seem to be a match made in heaven- incredible top-end clarity and 3D imagery with the warmth of the Exposure amplification. Go for it!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-08-10, 07:24 PM
RossB RossB is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gromit
I have also been quite shocked (or rather pleasantly surprised) how close the XXI/Super XVIII mono's run my previous IX/XIV/IVDR. In fact there are some aspects that I actually prefer the XXI/XVIII's - perhaps giving even more credence to the rumour(?) that JF himself always liked the XXI pre so much, reckoning it was the finest pre-amp he made.
I have recently been re-evaluating the Exposure preamps, having initially owned a XVII about a decade ago, replacing it with a XXI, then acquiring a XIV/IX last year, and a XVII again more recently.

Of the three, I find I prefer the XVII, then the XXI, and the XIV/IX the least (although the latter may have had some issues, and has recently been serviced by its current owner, with some apparent improvements). The XIV/IX I found somewhat coarse and grainy sounding. The XXI sounded very similar, but with a greater smoothness, and without the coarseness. The XVII sounds a little different - smaller, perhaps a tad less bass depth, a slightly tipped up treble, but also with a sweeter, more liquid sound than either of the other two. The internal phono stage of the XVII remains stunning, and I am not sure that the standalone XIII (which I also own) is really an improvement. Compared to the XVII, the XXI sounds bigger, more three dimensional, but sounds a shade less musical to my ears. Having said this, I could (and do) happily live with either the XXI or the XVII and would prefer either of these to just about any other amps, including the Naim, Accuphase, Jeff Rowland, Cambridge, Conrad Johnson, and many other amps I have owned over the years.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 13-08-10, 09:44 AM
Gromit Gromit is online now
Buffet-blower
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by RossB View Post
Of the three, I find I prefer the XVII, then the XXI, and the XIV/IX the least (although the latter may have had some issues, and has recently been serviced by its current owner, with some apparent improvements). The XIV/IX I found somewhat coarse and grainy sounding. The XXI sounded very similar, but with a greater smoothness, and without the coarseness.
Seems we're not alone in this view of the IX/XIV as I came to similar conclusions with mine, which had been serviced by Exposure (all new caps in the IX and a once-over of the XIV) within the last 12 months. Plenty of drama from the IX/XIV but a slight clumsiness I thought - the XXI is neater, more adept at subtle musical shifts etc and greater realism (call it less 'colour' if you like).

In terms of out and out grunt, the XVIII's seem to give very little if anything away to the IVDR aswell and match up beautifully with the XXI.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
pink fish media