View Full Version : Dynaco A-25 vs. Acoustic Research AR-4x


Rocco
09-07-2010, 03:01 PM
Trying to decide to buy a pair of the AR-4x's or the Dynaco A-25s. I've heard the Acoustic Research speakers are a bit fussy and may need the tweeter pots fixed on many, while the Dynaco's are more a trouble-free vintage purchase.

I've heard good things about the sound from either brand, but--

Which do you like and why?

tmad40blue
09-07-2010, 03:08 PM
Get both. They're very different and both are great.

For the AR's, follow my complete AR-4x pot restoration guide, HERE: http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=306818

JohnVF
09-07-2010, 03:15 PM
A-25s. About the only pair of speakers I regret getting rid of. I had two or three pairs of AR-4x and don't regret hardly ever listening to them, or getting rid of them. The A-25, to me, was more on par with the AR-2ax, and also some more modern speakers, than the Ar-4x.

mr_wetland
09-07-2010, 03:41 PM
I have both, love both, if you can, get both. They're different, but both very good in their own way. What you say about the pots on the AR's is true, they need to be taken apart and cleaned up on a regular basis in my experience. They are the firs bookshelf speakers I've owned that actually seem to like being on a bookshelf. The A-25s are excellent anywhere, and except for a recent experience wtih a MAC1900 receiver, seem to like any power source. Again, I like them both. If I was forced to make a decision between the two, I'd go with the Dynaco's but it wouldn't be an easy decision.

mhardy6647
09-07-2010, 03:44 PM
If I could only have one pair of those two, my choice without hesitation would be the A-25; it is in another class entirely than the AR-4ax in my estimation.

Rocco
09-07-2010, 04:06 PM
Thanks for the quick responses, I had to make up my mind rather quickly on a couple auctions! I read several reviews (on both pairs) and used the search function (here) but wanted a last minute word, thanks again!

I bought the Dynaco A-25s, a super-clean near-mint pair!

Will be replacing a new pair of Polk Audio TSi200. Nice little speakers but sound very "modern" to me. Real loud and punchy though, great bass for such little guys. I just want to try something more "organic". The Polk do a great job of filling up a large room and can handle lots of power (again for a little speaker) but are maybe better suited for synthesizer type music, in my opinion. They do sound great playing Kraftwerk but sound a little sterile playing Miles Davis.

It's all in good fun, and I can't wait to try out my A-25s!

tmad40blue
09-07-2010, 04:11 PM
Ohhhhhh man. You will love love love the Dynacos for jazz.


What will you be powering them with?

Rocco
09-07-2010, 04:18 PM
Powering with a Marantz 2245 and my Technics SL-1200MK5 with Shure M97xE cart. I'm getting my old Pioneer 12D II serviced right now and will try it out to compare soon with the Technics. I'm on a "vintage" kick I suppose and although the Technics is an old design it somehow seems high-tech to me!

tmad40blue
09-07-2010, 04:22 PM
The Dynacos will sound truly astonishing paired with that Marantz. You will be very pleasantly surprised.

Nat
09-07-2010, 07:38 PM
I think you chose well. While the 4x is a lovely looking speaker - for some reason, its proportions and textures seem nicer to me than practically any speaker made - the A 25 sounds a lot better to me, and looks pretty nice too.

TransduceLuv
09-07-2010, 07:56 PM
Powering with a Marantz 2245 and my Technics SL-1200MK5 with Shure M97xE cart. I'm getting my old Pioneer 12D II serviced right now and will try it out to compare soon with the Technics. I'm on a "vintage" kick I suppose and although the Technics is an old design it somehow seems high-tech to me!

That should be fantastic combination, I think those had the seas drivers in them, very high end manufacturer. theres a guy on the Santa Barbara craiglist that has 2 pairs forgot which ones for 125.00 for all!

Rocco
09-07-2010, 08:59 PM
Glad to hear the A-25s should sound nice with my Marantz, now I just got to wait for the shipping!

I still like the look of the ARs, maybe get a pair too (someday)--I wonder how they would sound with the Dynacos, running 4 speakers? I do plan to use the Dynacos with my old mystery Marantz speakers because it's a real big room. (I should take a pic of the Marantz speakers and see if someone hear recognizes them.)

fotno
09-07-2010, 09:20 PM
A-25s. About the only pair of speakers I regret getting rid of. I had two or three pairs of AR-4x and don't regret hardly ever listening to them, or getting rid of them. The A-25, to me, was more on par with the AR-2ax, and also some more modern speakers, than the Ar-4x.

Exactly. The AR-4x is nice speaker for what it is, the A-25 is nice speaker period.

tmad40blue
09-07-2010, 09:20 PM
Glad to hear the A-25s should sound nice with my Marantz, now I just got to wait for the shipping!

I still like the look of the ARs, maybe get a pair too (someday)--I wonder how they would sound with the Dynacos, running 4 speakers? I do plan to use the Dynacos with my old mystery Marantz speakers because it's a real big room. (I should take a pic of the Marantz speakers and see if someone hear recognizes them.)

THAT would be a no-no the AR-4x are 4 ohm.

krlill
09-07-2010, 09:40 PM
My AR-4x is 8 ohms.

I think the AR-3 and AR-3a are the 4 ohm speakers.

Fisherdude
09-07-2010, 10:16 PM
Good decision.:yes:

johnda
09-07-2010, 10:17 PM
I owned both AR 4x's (My granddaughter has them) and the Dynaco A-25's (they developed mold in the cabinets and I had to let them go). The AR 4x speakers are 8 ohm impedance, only the 3 and 3a's are 4 ohm. The AR 4x was slightly more efficient than the Dynacos and ran beautifully with the Dyaco SCa-35 tube amp putting out only 17.5 watts/channel. The Dyancos were happy with amplifiers running between 50 and 70 watts/channel. They both sounded very nice, but the nod goes to the Dynacos for their excellent bass response and imaging.

The ARs did get the well known tweeter control crud problem and I had to replace them. The Dynacos never had any problems other than the mold forming, which was not their fault, it was a damp basement's fault, our new home is dryer downstairs.

Congrats on picking up the A-25's they are great speakers.

JonL
09-07-2010, 10:48 PM
I also had AR-4x with a Dynaco SCA-35, and the combination sounded great though it got only *just* loud enough without much room for more. I'm surprised that the Dynacos are less efficient. I'm in the process of putting together a set of A25s, it will be interesting to give them a listen. I still have my old AR-4x (and the SCA-35, which is in my office rig), but the ARs need serious attention. I bought new (used) woofers for them a couple of years ago and haven't put them in yet. I also need one tweeter, and of course the crossover and control will need to be redone. Not going to happen soon, I'm sorry to say, though it would be nice to A-B them with the Dynacos. I'm thinking about putting the Dynacos on top of my La Scalas temporarily to see how glaring the difference is.

audiojones
09-07-2010, 11:08 PM
I also had AR-4x with a Dynaco SCA-35, and the combination sounded great though it got only *just* loud enough without much room for more. I'm surprised that the Dynacos are less efficient.

I would think that the AR4x would be less efficient than the Dynaco A25 since the 4x is an acoustic suspension speaker and the woofer goes through an inductor coil. The Dynaco woofer is basically a full range driver wired right to the cabinet terminals and placed in a vented enclosure.

I had both the A25 and the 4x hooked up to the same amp (in different rooms) and found the 4x to have much better bass response but the A25 was a smoother sounding speaker overall. The highs on the A25 were rather rolled off but it was a nice speaker and (IMHO) more accurate than the AR4x. In my particular case I found the A25 to be more efficient (read louder) than the AR4x.

Just for the record I sold them both as soon as I heard the samller advent :music:

MeatInStereo
09-07-2010, 11:11 PM
I have both and the Dynaco A25 IMO is a great full range speaker and will have better bass and clarity when properly placed. But if you can swing both....get them both.

Ogors
09-08-2010, 10:53 AM
Have only listened to the a-25's and they quickly became a wife room speaker did not perform well on everything. Most dramatically failed to reproduce electronica well. Lovely detail and warmth though. If you have the opertunity to buy both I'd highly recommend listening to both with a wide range of music. I do love listening to Jazz on the dynaco's.

tmad40blue
09-08-2010, 11:21 AM
Have only listened to the a-25's and they quickly became a wife room speaker did not perform well on everything. Most dramatically failed to reproduce electronica well. Lovely detail and warmth though. If you have the opertunity to buy both I'd highly recommend listening to both with a wide range of music. I do love listening to Jazz on the dynaco's.

Electronica did not exist when the A25's were being manufactured, so don't expect them to reproduce it well.

JohnVF
09-08-2010, 11:43 AM
Electronica did not exist when the A25's were being manufactured, so don't expect them to reproduce it well.

:scratch2:

tmad40blue
09-08-2010, 02:27 PM
:scratch2:

Just a thought... :p:

JohnVF
09-08-2010, 02:35 PM
Just a thought... :p:

I'm just saying...if it's truly good, it 'should' be able to play any musical signal as its all the same to the amp and speakers. But I get what you're saying..and it does have elements, especially really low (below a bass guitar) but quick/dynamic bass that wasn't typical for the time period. Even classical music that would have bass as low or lower wouldn't have it in the same way. Most modern speakers below a certain price point would probably be pretty poor at portraying anything the A-25 couldn't reproduce well, though, too.

sla429
09-08-2010, 06:38 PM
I would think that the AR4x would be less efficient than the Dynaco A25 since the 4x is an acoustic suspension speaker and the woofer goes through an inductor coil. The Dynaco woofer is basically a full range driver wired right to the cabinet terminals and placed in a vented enclosure.

I had both the A25 and the 4x hooked up to the same amp (in different rooms) and found the 4x to have much better bass response but the A25 was a smoother sounding speaker overall. The highs on the A25 were rather rolled off but it was a nice speaker and (IMHO) more accurate than the AR4x. In my particular case I found the A25 to be more efficient (read louder) than the AR4x.

Just for the record I sold them both as soon as I heard the samller advent :music: I understand, I have A-25's and Smaller Advents. Both are great. If properly placed , don't bypass Bose 301's series 1 and 2

shacky
09-08-2010, 07:29 PM
Both my pairs of A25's responded nicely to recapping. As well as new binding posts and strengthening the woofer mounts via some plywood glued beneath the baffle.

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9130.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9136.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9167.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9162.jpg

My 4x's have newer caps too but don't seem in same league as the Dynaco's :no:

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9468.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9509.jpg

Rocco
09-08-2010, 07:56 PM
Shacky, that Dynaco A-25 sure looks sweet there in your room--I'm getting very excited and the pair I just bought and can't wait for them to arrive home--thanks for the look!

shacky
09-08-2010, 08:15 PM
Thanks Rocco. Right now they are displaced by my Klipsch Forte's. The Forte's aren't as good looking (Light Oak) but boy do they sound sweet with my recapped Eico HF-81 :thmbsp:

nolan
09-08-2010, 08:30 PM
Both my pairs of A25's responded nicely to recapping. As well as new binding posts and strengthening the woofer mounts via some plywood glued beneath the baffle.

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9130.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9136.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9167.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9162.jpg

My 4x's have newer caps too but don't seem in same league as the Dynaco's :no:

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9468.jpg
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/shacky1973/IMGP9509.jpg

Great idea with the plywood behind the baffles. I am going to borrow that idea.:thmbsp:

johnda
09-08-2010, 10:30 PM
"Not going to happen soon, I'm sorry to say, though it would be nice to A-B them with the Dynacos. I'm thinking about putting the Dynacos on top of my La Scalas temporarily to see how glaring the difference is."

Now, THAT would be an interesting test! I've always wanted to get the LaScalas or the Altec Valencias, but don't have the room or the WAF, if I did have the room!

It's also interesting how folks differ on the efficiency of the AR4x and Dynaco A-25. My sense was that the AR was slightly more efficient, others have said they felt the Dynaco was more efficient. I guess that is what makes horse racing! :D In any case they both were great performers for the dollar.

Rocco
09-08-2010, 10:46 PM
Here's a link to a pretty cool article about the Dynaco A-25. It mentions that (in the author's opinion), the A-25s were loud, efficient speakers:

http://home.indy.net/~gregdunn/dynaco/components/speakers/index.html

shacky
09-08-2010, 11:14 PM
Great idea with the plywood behind the baffles. I am going to borrow that idea.:thmbsp:

I think it originally came from Zilch

JonL
09-08-2010, 11:22 PM
"Not going to happen soon, I'm sorry to say, though it would be nice to A-B them with the Dynacos. I'm thinking about putting the Dynacos on top of my La Scalas temporarily to see how glaring the difference is."

Now, THAT would be an interesting test! I've always wanted to get the LaScalas or the Altec Valencias, but don't have the room or the WAF, if I did have the room!

It's also interesting how folks differ on the efficiency of the AR4x and Dynaco A-25. My sense was that the AR was slightly more efficient, others have said they felt the Dynaco was more efficient. I guess that is what makes horse racing! :D In any case they both were great performers for the dollar.

Hey, Johnda... Southold is out east in Suffolk, no? Come check 'em out when I've got it set up. I no longer have the W to worry about in WAF so I got La Scalas even though my entire apartment is is about 300 sq ft. I do NOT have the room for La Scalas, but they are here anyway and won't be leaving until I leave with them.

luddite
03-26-2011, 11:14 PM
The AR 4x is definitely a power hungry speaker. For some reason, I love the sound of it with the jazz trumpet on certain recordings, like Kind Of Blue, since it tones down the bright side that can be a bit too much at high volume. The speaker is at its best at high volume. Like, really loud. I like it a lot. The Dynaco A 25's are more even handed at lower volumes. Actually, I have found that the speakers are not always the same by comparison depending on the input source. Different recording engineering makes a huge difference, as does the type of music. Rock, country, jazz, classical orchestra or classical solo instruments, choral... all present differently and the recording engineering makes a huge difference. So different speakers compensate better for different recordings. The only thing I can say for sure is that if you are an audiophile and you enjoy listening to great recordings of great performances, you should have more pairs of speakers than any other type of equipment.
A pair of AR 4x's and a pair of Dynaco A 25's is a great start.
I'm waiting for a pair of Altec Lansing Valencia's to show up on Craigslist here.

gkimeng
03-27-2011, 12:48 AM
I'd take the Dynacos as well. Although they are 2-ways like the AR-4x, they are actually at a similar performance level to the larger AR-2ax.

tubed
03-27-2011, 01:03 AM
For me, Dynaco over the 4x's all day, but not compared to the AR-4.

AR4x
04-16-2012, 12:03 AM
For me, Dynaco over the 4x's all day, but not compared to the AR-4.

I had both the AR4x, AR4 and Dynaco A25, Dynaco A25XL.

The 4 has better mid than the 4x, but no where close to what the A25 offered (one of my friends gave up their much more expensive Tannoy and kept the A25).

The 4x gives better bass response than the 4 though, I hear it goes deeper.

Overall, I will go for the A25XL any day, much better overall speaker than the AR4 or AR4x. Sometimes, I even prefer the A25XL over the AR5. There is something special about the A25s, I guess it's the "musicality".

hifitommy
04-16-2012, 02:02 AM
i bought new a25s after i direct comparison to the ar4s at pacific stereo in the early 70s. on the cut-jump into the fire-on nillsson scmillsson, the music descends into a duel between a kick drum and bass guitar. the difference between the two instruments is crystal clear on the a25s, not so much on the ARs.

nickrobotron
04-16-2012, 02:39 AM
Old post, but for the record, Dynacos over ARs any day of the friggin week. I've owned both and the AR-4x were a major disappointment for me. Clean pots, new caps, redoped surrounds... nothing made them sound good to my ears. The Dynacos with old caps sounded better. I did end up selling my A-25's too, but it took a little while longer. I'd love to find another pair for my bedroom.

The AR-4x speakers sound very boxy with rolled off highs. The Dynacos sound like newer speakers. Punchy and fun bass with detailed, yet smooth highs. It's been a while. I'd be interested in trying a pair of Dynacos again.

bonejob
05-07-2012, 03:40 AM
Trying to decide to buy a pair of the AR-4x's or the Dynaco A-25s. I've heard the Acoustic Research speakers are a bit fussy and may need the tweeter pots fixed on many, while the Dynaco's are more a trouble-free vintage purchase.

I've heard good things about the sound from either brand, but--

Which do you like and why?

Old thread I know, but since both models are perennially plentiful on Fleabay, I think it's still relevant to all those who are still seeking after these.

On sound quality alone, I slightly prefer the dynacos. The AR-4x's 8" woofer sounds slightly underdamped and I think this is by design, to give a fuller, warmer sound - to compensate for its lack of much real bass below 60 Hz or so. I'm really only aware of this when I compare them to the dynas or the bigger speakers in AR's own line, like the AR-2ax or especially the AR-3a. At first listen, with say, a recording of chamber music, the AR-4x actually makes the AR-3a sound a little thin. But upon longer listening, one notices that the cello and bass sound as well as low-range piano is being artificially bloomed or bloated a little on the AR-4x, whereas the AR-3a is the real thing, with real bass solid to at least 30 Hz. No need for the illusion of bass here, so the bass is kept well damped and tight.

The dynas use a larger woofer, with a unique enclosure design. Dyna calls it "aperiodic." The idea is a smallish enclosure that keeps the 10" woofer very well controlled. Above the woofer's 55 Hz resonance frequency, the enclosure behaves like a small acoustic suspension box, with tight, very well controlled, but severely rolled-off bass response. But below the woofer resonance frequency, the stuffed vent in the front baffle board becomes acoustically transparent, transforming the enclosure into effectively a very large infinite baffle, extending the bass response considerably. The side benefit is a very flat impedance curve never dipping at any time below 7 ohms. The temptation whenever one sees any kind of a vent is to label it a "bass reflex" enclosure. It is NOT! In its operation, it most resembles a variant of the classic transmission line enclosure.

The end result is, the dynaco has tighter, better defined bass response than the AR-4x and has more true low bass extension. On some program material, though, the AR-4x may sound "bassier." This is a coloration! For many, a pleasant coloration, but a coloration nevertheless. It is an emphasis at about the 50-70 Hz region, coupled with an underdamped quality, likely caused by the 8" woofer being mounted in an enclosure that is a touch too large. But with recordings with true content below 50 Hz, the dynaco's superior extension is obvious. What's more, I find the "bloomy" quality, or some might say "woolliness" of the AR-4x, can be fatiguing over time.

The Dynaco is superior through the midrange in my opinion, too. More neutral. The difference is very noticeable with voices, especially male voices. The AR's can sound a bit "chesty," with a hint of... well... like, try saying "SHHHHHHH" and placing your hands on either side of your mouth, shaping them like a megaphone. Go back and forth and listen to the difference - hands in place, hands gone. The AR's have a bit of that "megaphone" effect. It most noticeably colors voices and to a lesser degree, strings. Choral sound is especially vulnerable to this coloration. The AR-4x is a fine speaker, especially in its price range, but the Dynaco is simply outstanding - better in this respect than most speakers of its day regardless of price.

I can't say which speaker a given individual might prefer. But the Dynaco has less coloration - especially the colorations that most irritate me!

Lastly, the Dynaco is a much simpler box. The crossover is a simple high-pass capacitor - no inductors. The AR uses a more complex inductance/capacitance crossover network. Moreover, the AR-4x pots are notoriously bad at 40 years of age, ruined by corrosion, dirt, etc. Instead of the continuously variable resistor of the AR, the dynacos have just a three-position switch, with different fixed values of resistors in place for each detent, padding down the relative level of the tweeter vis--vis woofer - high, medium, low.

After 40 years, the dynaco will still almost certainly be working. Changing the single cap on the tweeter is still highly recommended though, because it will almost certainly no longer be up to spec. But this is a very simple operation and much better caps than the originals can be had through Parts Express or Madisound very inexpensively. Addressing the issue of a nasty, noisy or totally open pot on an AR-4x can be moderately easy, or all the way to a pain in the ass!

Lastly, the woofer surrounds on dynacos were butyl rubber. They DO NOT ROT! Nor do they leak. Most AR-4x's woofers had cloth surrounds. They may or may not be rotten. If they are not rotten, the doping of the cloth is almost certainly gone, so the surrounds leak air - right through the cloth. If they are rotten, of course the woofers will need new surrounds. If they are not rotten, you will need to re-dope the cloth with a doping agent. A little research - perhaps on these forums - should tell you what you need. I've seen Aleene's Tacky Glue mentioned. Others swear by Permatex High Tack diluted with toluene or lacquer thinner. I've even seen rubber cement thinned with heptane (both usually available at crafts stores like Michael's) mentioned as a suitable doping agent.

The tweeters on dynacos don't rot either. The original domes rarely have problems, unless they have been abused - usually someone trying to get 100 watts out of a 20-watt receiver. But even so, the original manufacturer of the dynaco drivers - SEAS - still makes a recommended drop-in replacement tweeter for the A-25. It fits the hole size and screw pattern exactly and is claimed to offer superior performance to the original, without altering the characteristic tonal balance of the speaker. By the way, there is also an OEM woofer replacement still being sold by the original manufacturer, in the very rare case one would be needed.

The bottom line here is that old dynacos - if they are complete, and haven't been in a flood or burned in a fire - will almost surely be working and virtually "plug-'n-play" ready, needing a simple cap replacement to bring them back up to spec. The rest is just cosmetics - relevant to your interior decor, but not to the sound you hear. Any issues regarding component replacement with dynacos involve easy and nearly painless solutions, with brand new replacements still being readily available at reasonable cost from their original manufacturer.

So, to me it's a no-brainer. While the superiority of the dynacos' sound to the AR-4x's is subject to some debate, buying a used pair of dynacos that are in run-ready shape is much less of a dicey proposition than finding good AR's. If you want to be assured of top-quality, turn-key AR-4x's, you will need to look at well-restored examples and you will have to pay top dollar for them. A bargain pair of AR-4x's will almost CERTAINLY need work, maybe a lot of work, before you can run them. Bargain dynacos that look rough (stained and/or scratched veneer, cabinet slathered with ugly paint or covered in olive-green shag carpet, tatty or missing grilles, used in somebody's garage system, etc.) but still work just great are plentiful. Good-looking ones with small cosmetic issues - but also work great - are also widely available for decent pricing. As for restorations, most dynaco "restorations" involve the externals, like sanding, filling, re-staining/re-oiling of the walnut veneer and grill cloth replacement. Rarely do the working innards need attention other than the usual cheap and easy re-capping of the tweeters. But unlike with AR's, the top-dollar dynacos are usually not restorations at all but unmolested survivors that are "minty-fresh" or near-mint, stored in their original boxes, in the basement of the Smithsonian, in sealed compartments filled with argon gas, blah, blah... About a year ago I even saw for sale a NIB pair!

If you love AR's, buy the AR-4x. If you like projects, if you like the warm and fuzzies that go with saving classics that need TLC and are worthy of the effort to preserve them, buy the AR-4x's. If you want a working example of one of the best speakers of its kind and don't want to spend a lot of time or effort putting it back to rights, get the dynaco A-25's, plug them in and enjoy!

MWalt
05-07-2012, 06:34 AM
Both my pairs of A25's responded nicely to recapping. As well as new binding posts and strengthening the woofer mounts via some plywood glued beneath the baffle.



Those look great. I did almost exactly the same upgrades to my A-25's and they sound fantastic. The only vintage speakers that I have left.

RadioOn
05-25-2012, 01:10 AM
The only vintage gear I have that I originally owned from the '70s is a pair of A-25s. Thankfully, for some reason I dragged these things with me for five home moves since 1980 and only two months ago finally hooked them up again. These things still sound great. The grille on one speaker is loose so I checked the surround on the woofer - looks like new. Either by design or luck these speakers stand the test of time.

RadioOn
05-25-2012, 01:44 AM
And A-25s can be found for what I think are quite reasonable prices even on eBay. (At least compared to the sometimes bloated prices for PAS3s or ST-70s.)

hifitommy
05-25-2012, 11:07 AM
stacking two pairs in parallel can yield excellent sound and will play louder than you need. we did this with a phase linear 400 back in the day and there was no limit to playback level. a single pair will be sometimes inadequate for big classical works or arena rock.

thes speakers deserve a good and powerful amp due to their low sensitivity, and sound quality. the bass is very similar in sound to the vaunted quad 57s in both extension and character. they benefit from the addition of a tweeter added above 10kHz and become airy and tighter across the freq band. i wouldnt damage the cabinet by mounting it on the baffel but balance the tweet on the front edge which really isnt unsightly. a small piece of double stick foam could anchor it nicely.

Westy56
05-25-2012, 12:28 PM
I stacked A25's with 4X's one time. :music:
They really sounded good together.

Better than just one or the other.


Steve

johnda
07-06-2012, 10:20 PM
Hey, Johnda... Southold is out east in Suffolk, no? Come check 'em out when I've got it set up. I no longer have the W to worry about in WAF so I got La Scalas even though my entire apartment is is about 300 sq ft. I do NOT have the room for La Scalas, but they are here anyway and won't be leaving until I leave with them.

Sorry JonL,

I just saw your response above. OMG you have LaScala's in your apartment? Cool. Yep, I'm way the heck out on the east end in wine country. Because of medical issues, I'm afraid I couldn't make it over to your place to hear those LaScala's if it's more west of me than Riverhead.

Folks, about my feeling that the AR's were more efficient than the Dynacos... I had totally replaced the tweeter level controls on the 4x's because of that crud problem. It may have made them sound brighter than originally.

In any case the A25 was the winner in overall response and resistance to aging problems.

ukfan4sure!
10-31-2012, 05:27 PM
Sorry to bring up an old post, but I happen to recently acquire a matched foursome of these AR-4x and Dynaco a25's.

Hands down. The Dynaco's are better. Less fuss, too.

CohibaJoe
10-31-2012, 06:03 PM
I pickup a Pair this summer. Sitting in my closet for a complete make over this winter. Sound for when they came out...to my ears..are Nice overall.

Compair to today's speakers...These need a Make Over. Will start a thread in Nov.

archie2
12-28-2012, 10:05 PM
Driving AR 4x speakers with a good EL84 PP tube amp makes a very significant sound upgrade.

johnda
12-28-2012, 10:46 PM
Right, the AR4x is an easy 8 ohm load and the AR3a is 4. I had both the Dynaco A-25 and the AR4x, the Dynaco developed mold and had to be discarded, the AR4x was given to my granddaughter and her boyfriend. They broke up, she got the dog, and he kept my AR4x speakers. He got the better of the deal! Update : she kept the AR4x. Speakers, good for her!

The Dynaco was superior to the RA4x, but the AR4x was no slouch. You can't go wrong with either.