Exposure amps. I feel like revisiting them.

[Floyddroid]

I replied to a thread elsewhere here and set myself of hankering after some exposure pre and powers. Anyone out there had experience of the 17 pre and 18 mono's. I have seen a pair for sale and it's got me itching!:help:

[pjdowns]

Hi Steve,

I have a XVII and two XVIII amps Bi-amped and they are something quite wonderful.

I haven't had a chance to hear the 18 monos unfortunately but I'm sure they are also good.

Not sure I am entirely right but weren't the 17/18 the last pre/power by John Farlowe ?

[Welder]

I’ve got the 21RC pre, Super 18 Power and the 25RC. Offer me a NAD M2 and I might swap.
I’ve heard a few amps over the years, even bought a couple. :doh: The Exposures are still here. ;)
If you’ve found some then buy them. :)

[Pete The Cat]

I guess that experience of the XVIII monos may be limited given the “rare as hens' teeth” description when they infrequently come up.

I’m a sucker for that Farlowe era Exposure house sound. As power amps I’ve used an VIII, Super VIIIs bi-amped and a Super XVIII. Never managed any of the monos or that other grail the IV Dual Regulated due to silly prices in recent years. As preamps VII and VI, XI and 2 x VIs and the XVII relevant to your post which remains my preamp today. The common thread is warm, upfront presentation and great bottom end thump, although I guess some may see it as coloured.

The XVII pre became my favourite due to being a touch crisper than the XI, which was so warm and rich as to be “dark” (real cymbals should have some zing). It has a built-in phono stage which I think was his last, I don't recall that the XIX and XXI have phono stages, after which I believe he called it a day and ended up emigrating. There’s a review of the XVII and Super XVIII combination somewhere on the web along the lines of the reviewer looking for his final system and ever so nearly finding it in them.

Prices seem to be a bit more sensible very recently so I would grab the opportunity, I’ve seen some of the top end Farlowe amps going for less or failing to sell. In the absence of being able to go further up the Exposure ladder I found a pair of Avondale monos which topped the Super XVIII and which I can’t see myself parting with now, they have a similar house sound but a touch more of everything all round.

That’s half an answer for you.

Pete

[southall-1998]

I've heard John Farlowe's last top of the range Exposure mono's last year. All I can say they were VERY dynamic sounding!!!!

[Floyddroid]

Cheers Pete. That's great and very helpful. Would you say £1200 would be about right?
I guess that experience of the XVIII monos may be limited given the “rare as hens' teeth” description when they infrequently come up.

I’m a sucker for that Farlowe era Exposure house sound. As power amps I’ve used an VIII, Super VIIIs bi-amped and a Super XVIII. Never managed any of the monos or that other grail the IV Dual Regulated due to silly prices in recent years. As preamps VII and VI, XI and 2 x VIs and the XVII relevant to your post which remains my preamp today. The common thread is warm, upfront presentation and great bottom end thump, although I guess some may see it as coloured.

The XVII pre became my favourite due to being a touch crisper than the XI, which was so warm and rich as to be “dark” (real cymbals should have some zing). It has a built-in phono stage which I think was his last, I don't recall that the XIX and XXI have phono stages, after which I believe he called it a day and ended up emigrating. There’s a review of the XVII and Super XVIII combination somewhere on the web along the lines of the reviewer looking for his final system and ever so nearly finding it in them.

Prices seem to be a bit more sensible very recently so I would grab the opportunity, I’ve seen some of the top end Farlowe amps going for less or failing to sell. In the absence of being able to go further up the Exposure ladder I found a pair of Avondale monos which topped the Super XVIII and which I can’t see myself parting with now, they have a similar house sound but a touch more of everything all round.

That’s half an answer for you.

Pete

[DSJR]

I prefer the Farlowe era pres and powers (not harsh like early 80's naim could be), but you may find the preamps a bit veiled by todays standards perhaps? The X integrated 'grated' on my ears when someone bought a newish one in for a dem. Very harsh/ringy toned, especially when pushed - maybe it was faulty or out of alignment, but could explain why Shane didn't find the Croft pair he had last year 'moving' enough?

[istari_knight]

I prefer the Farlowe era pres and powers (not harsh like early 80's naim could be), but you may find the preamps a bit veiled by todays standards perhaps? The X integrated 'grated' on my ears when someone bought a newish one in for a dem. Very harsh/ringy toned, especially when pushed - maybe it was faulty or out of alignment, but could explain why Shane didn't find the Croft pair he had last year 'moving' enough?

Exactly my experience of the X... Good budget amp but lets not get carried away...

I found the XX to be a huge improvement until I compared it with a Denon PMA-250 [mk1] and couldnt hear any difference on line level sources :scratch:

[Pete The Cat]

Cheers Pete. That's great and very helpful. Would you say £1200 would be about right?

In a market where an item is so rare it's not an exact science, but put it this way that figure wouldn't be wrong. Per Flemming or cliffyboy on Pink Fish would be good contacts to check with but I'd take them if I were you.

Pete

[Welder]

I prefer the Farlowe era pres and powers (not harsh like early 80's naim could be), but you may find the preamps a bit veiled by todays standards perhaps? The X integrated 'grated' on my ears when someone bought a newish one in for a dem. Very harsh/ringy toned, especially when pushed - maybe it was faulty or out of alignment, but could explain why Shane didn't find the Croft pair he had last year 'moving' enough?

Well, there you go. This is obviously one of the benefits of having really good hearing and a really long memory. ;)

The reasons I would recommend Exposure amps doesn’t have an awful lot to do with how they sound……….it’s an amplifier after all. :eyebrows:

What they do seem to do rather well is drive a wide range of speakers with throwing hissy fits, are well constructed, stable, repairable by Exposure if required and don’t cost silly money. Oh arr, I kinda like the way they look as well. :D

Maybe the critics had one of them there synergy mismatches.:scratch:

[Rick E]

I had similar issues with the wrong synergy/speakers.

Used with some, they were superb. Detail and imaging that you could reach out and touch.

Used with others, watch your tooth enamel!

I had the 17/18's and they can sound really nice. Just be a bit cautious if you think your speakers can be harsh in the top end.

[pjdowns]

I had the 17/18's and they can sound really nice. Just be a bit cautious if you think your speakers can be harsh in the top end.

Interesting, some people would argue the ES-14's are have a harsh, or spalashy sounding top end but I find they work excellently with the 17 and 18... however, adding the second 18 took it into a completely different world!! I feel encapsulated into the sound almost as if I were listening to a surround sound system although better...

[pjdowns]

What they do seem to do rather well is drive a wide range of speakers with throwing hissy fits, are well constructed, stable, repairable by Exposure if required and don’t cost silly money. Oh arr, I kinda like the way they look as well. :D

Maybe the critics had one of them there synergy mismatches.:scratch:

I think you're right John because I find they drive my ES-14's with ease (and they are described as a difficult load) and have driven many more challanging speakers without complaining!

[Rick E]

Interesting, some people would argue the ES-14's are have a harsh, or spalashy sounding top end but I find they work excellently with the 17 and 18... however, adding the second 18 took it into a completely different world!! I feel encapsulated into the sound almost as if I were listening to a surround sound system although better...

Horses for courses Paul. I had the entire Epos range back then, and would not have said they were harsh at all. I suppose it all depends on your personal idea of bright.

[Pete The Cat]

As ever it’s about synergy with other kit, and our own individual hearing. In my experience old Exposures are more likely to err towards being too warm for some, rather than harsh. Ultimately for the OP’s benefit they’ll certainly re-sell if they’re not to your personal taste.

Pete

[Floyddroid]

Sod it, i'm going to buy em!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eyebrows:

[pjdowns]

Sod it, i'm going to buy em!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eyebrows:

That's the right answer :) :)

[Floyddroid]

Well got em today. Un-inspiring on the eye, awe-inspiring on the ears and emotions. Big up to Carlo Merengo at Audiophilia. Top bloke. Great to deal with and passionate about his music. Typical Italian. Just been listening to Focus. I thought i was going to need a seat belt. Grinning like a Cheshire cat. Thanks to you AOS guru's for your guidance.

[Virkon]

Good purchase old boy they hit a chord with me alright. Enjoy.

[pjdowns]

Glad you've got them Steve and also glad you are happy.. Exposure amps have something rather special about them :)

P.

[Pete The Cat]

Sounds like you've won first prize in the hi-fi lottery.

Pete

[Floyddroid]

Indeed Pete.

Sounds like you've won first prize in the hi-fi lottery.

Pete