# Cerwin Vega EXL & Arc Audio - Guts Comparison Pics



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

I know some will be interested, so I snapped these while I had them in hand. Would welcome someone to post the arc 4050xxk internals as well. Interesting is that even the caps inside look identical in brand.

These are of the cerwin vega EXL 400.4 and of an Arc 5150XXK (that has the board curiously marked differently as 5150CXLR)

CV EXL 400.4

























Arc 5150XXK









































CV 350.2 Picture in this thread:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32142&highlight=exl+350.2


----------



## squeak9798 (Apr 20, 2005)

txbonds said:


> Arc 5150XXK (that has the board curiously marked differently as 5150CXLR)


Not really all that curiously, considering [from what I remember] the XXK series uses the same boards as the CXL series.


----------



## CAMSHAFT (Apr 7, 2006)

I don't see it...


----------



## dbphelps (Jun 30, 2006)

CAMSHAFT said:


> I don't see it...


Huh?

Don't see what? The amps caps, the same design, the same input stage, the same output?

They are both designed and OEM'd by the same people... They ARE the same fricken amp design with the same parts...

Point being, the Cerwin Vega EXL amps are 100% identical to the same rated Arc Audio, Eton, Diamond and at least 2-3 other manufacturers out there...

The final word in this is, THE CERWIN VEGA EXL SERIES IS THE SHIZNIT!!!

Especially for the price point they are available at... NOTHING can touch them on the price/value...

To buy any Arc used or otherwise is FOOLISH... Same goes for any of the other brands as you can get a Cerwin Vega EXL amp with a 2 year warranty for 1/4 the price... END OF SUBJECT...

Man, some people are so hung up on a name... Funny thing is that Cerwin Vega was never really known as a 'low-price leader'... They were always in the midline to high-end...

But, that's ok... Keep being snobs and ignore a good thing when you see it... Just don't open that trunk and let anyone see you running those damn sexy CV power-plants...


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

While to my untrained eye I'd say there looks to be a similar layout, you're off your rocker if you think those two amps will perform the same.


----------



## DiamondFanatic (Dec 26, 2007)

I will say I'm not an expert at this either, but I'm with the above poster. They dont even have the same number of caps etc...
Wait, and one is a 5 channel and one is a 4 channel?


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

DiamondFanatic said:


> I will say I'm not an expert at this either, but I'm with the above poster. They dont even have the same number of caps etc...
> Wait, and one is a 5 channel and one is a 4 channel?


I never claimed them to peform the same and I also welcomed anyone to post an arc 4150 which would be the counterpart to the cerwin vega exl 400.4. I simply happen to have these two amps on hand to take pics of, and in a few other threads people are asking for comparison guts pics of the vega exls and the arcs. The 4050 is an xxk series amp, as is the 5150, so thats the only tie.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

quality_sound said:


> While to my untrained eye I'd say there looks to be a similar layout, you're off your rocker if you think those two amps will perform the same.


other than 1 is 4 channel and 1 if 5 channel, what do you mean about performance differences? What would be the difference? Just curious.

Curious because I still have the 5150 and haven't sold it yet, so if there is some reason it's going to be light years better than the vega's, I should know now while I could still do something.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> While to my untrained eye I'd say there looks to be a similar layout, you're off your rocker if you think those two amps will perform the same.


IF, those amps have the same boards and parts, they WILL perform the same. What, is the ARC name on it the equivalent of a ricer adding horsepower with stickers?


----------



## nismos14 (Jun 22, 2007)

The point is although the parts look similar, they are not.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

nismos14 said:


> The point is although the parts look similar, they are not.



I never said they actually were the same because I don't know, but if you know they're not, what's different?


----------



## nismos14 (Jun 22, 2007)

89grand said:


> I never said they actually were the same because I don't know, but if you know they're not, what's different?


There was a similar scenario in the past with the 1500xxk and some clarion amps it was found that the amps did not use the same parts though the boards were the same, this is not to say that the exl's will sound bad, hell I was contemplating getting one, still might lol. Point is though, they are likely not the identical build.


----------



## JAX (Jun 2, 2006)

nismos14 said:


> There was a similar scenario in the past with the 1500xxk and some clarion amps it was found that the amps did not use the same parts though the boards were the same, this is not to say that the exl's will sound bad, hell I was contemplating getting one, still might lol. Point is though, they are likely not the identical build.



And I would like to know why you dont think its the same...? is it just too much to accept that ARC would be ripping people just cause of the name..

I am not arguing ..I dont own a CV amp but I have had ARCS.....

I just want to know why it is you feel like you do when you dont own one and some of the other posters actually do and actually have used them


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

These are old Robert Zeff designs done in the late 70's early 80's. Not much has changed guys. Moving the same parts around on the circuit board to create a visual appearance that appears different or special "tweaks" is just plain comedy. Funny thing is, most class A/B designs peaked around the 70's 80's. There really is nothing new to be had out of class a/b unless you want to start playing with advanced power supply designs (class G/H). This is why when people start crying about china made/cloned amps it is pure comedy.

The zapco guy can come call BS if he wants, but Robert Zeff provides consulting services under the name nikola engineering. He recycled his zapco design to ARC, Clarion, and Cerwin Vega to name a few (but it's certain models). I said this all in the hot deals thread and cut and paste from his site before it recently got changed. If you look at the values and part numbers of the basic components, you will quickly find they are the same. Rail voltages are the same, capacitor values are the same (and same brand), same witht he transistors, etc etc.

Zapco keeps using the same basic design over and over in there ref level stuff and probably tweaks it for the the other stuff. For the DC line they had a company make some built in DSP and used the recycled design again. Does it matter? It does when people can fall prey to marketing hype.


----------



## nismos14 (Jun 22, 2007)

gentlejax2 said:


> And I would like to know why you dont think its the same...? is it just too much to accept that ARC would be ripping people just cause of the name..
> 
> I am not arguing ..I dont own a CV amp but I have had ARCS.....
> 
> I just want to know why it is you feel like you do when you dont own one and some of the other posters actually do and actually have used them


It's just from what has been shown in the past, I have no concrete reasoning. I don't know maybe they are the same, I just dont know. I love the arc, but the price point is too much when I'm just looking for an amp for a beater. I might just have to try one out and see what I feel vs the xxk's I've owned.


----------



## phatredpt (Feb 22, 2006)

nismos14 said:


> The point is although the parts look similar, they are not.


Alright guys....looks like it is time to dump the amps we all bought up!
They must be crap after all!


----------



## dbphelps (Jun 30, 2006)

Some of you guys REALLY need to get a clue...

Of course those two amplifiers pictured are different, as one is a 4-channel, the other is a 5-channel... DUH!!!

The point is, THEY ARE OF THE SAME DESIGN, like mentioned, same design, same parts, same values = SAME SOUND and PERFORMANCE!!!

Eh gads, some people must just choose to shut off thier reasoning abilities at times... Gets tedious for those of us that can actually reason on a regular basis...

Why does so many of you act like electronics are all voodoo and magic?

This is simple, the Arc XXK/CXL lines, the Zapco Reference lines and all the rest of the brands that use this SAME DESIGN have been highly regarded, respected and sought after... So to those that have a clue, the Cerwin Vegas that got liquidated are one of the biggest steals out there as YOU GET THE SAME EXACT AMP for less than 1/4 the price of those other ones USED!!!

Now, please, stop the rambling, stop the drama, and enjoy what you have or go get a good deal somewhere...

I can't beleive the 'doubt' people extoll because they are now somehow feeling 'ripped off' because they bought something for a ton of cash and find something that pops up like these CVs that are available for dirt cheap... Don't be so butt-hurt because you spent more than the next guy...


----------



## nismos14 (Jun 22, 2007)

phatredpt said:


> Alright guys....looks like it is time to dump the amps we all bought up!
> They must be crap after all!


Haha


----------



## nismos14 (Jun 22, 2007)

I don't feel ripped off I made back all the money I spent on my XXK's and thensome


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

i'll stick with my pg amps that a lot of people are still afraid of even after the faulty parts were replaced with the real parts by a pg tech


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

I used to have a phoneix gold zx-450 and it was an awesome amp. 

The appeal to me about the Vega's is that I personally think they are the same as the arc's, or at least close enough to where I won't be able to tell a difference, and one of my last systems was using 70's & 80's technology products, so I feel at home with them. LOL

I should also add that it was way back that that I'm referring to also.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

Well to me, it's bad enough when people claim to be able to hear the differences between 2 different, but reasonably decent amps, but when they are exactly the same minus the name plate, and some still claim one is better...I don't know what else to say.

Maybe the guys from ARC place a drop of their blood or piss on the circuit board to make it sound better.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

LOL ........... Boy, I sure didn't mean to get all this started. I had been requested in some other threads though to post internal pics of both, while they were in my posession, so that's all my intention was, so that people could look and compare on their own.

Maybe I should have waited till after I sold my 5150xxk though.


----------



## nismos14 (Jun 22, 2007)

^ Haha, I doubt people watching the xxk auction will be on here or have seen this.


----------



## Daishi (Apr 18, 2006)

dbphelps said:


> Some of you guys REALLY need to get a clue...
> 
> Of course those two amplifiers pictured are different, as one is a 4-channel, the other is a 5-channel... DUH!!!
> 
> ...


THANK YOU for stating this. There is nothing different between the amps...seriously people.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

nismos14 said:


> ^ Haha, I doubt people watching the xxk auction will be on here or have seen this.


There are about 8 people watching now. The xxk is a nice amp, but was lacking in channels for what I wanted to do.

Although, I could always run an active front and sub from it very easily.


----------



## 3.5max6spd (Jun 29, 2005)

dbphelps said:


> I can't beleive the 'doubt' people extoll because they are now somehow feeling 'ripped off' because they bought something for a ton of cash and find something that pops up like these CVs that are available for dirt cheap... Don't be so butt-hurt because you spent more than the next guy...


Dont quite see how Arc is 'ripping off' anyone. They basically are a retail outlet/marketeer in the US for the same buildhouse(same person that owns Ubuy, owns Arc) that manufactures these Zeff designs, nothing more, nothing less.

Now a more favorable statement would be that because Vega cant sell a product with its name anymore and it ends up being sold for a fraction of its price by online distributors, that one can buy an equally solid Zeff design for less.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

txbonds said:


> other than 1 is 4 channel and 1 if 5 channel, what do you mean about performance differences? What would be the difference? Just curious.
> 
> Curious because I still have the 5150 and haven't sold it yet, so if there is some reason it's going to be light years better than the vega's, I should know now while I could still do something.





89grand said:


> IF, those amps have the same boards and parts, they WILL perform the same. What, is the ARC name on it the equivalent of a ricer adding horsepower with stickers?


If you look at those two amps and think the parts are anywhere near comparable you're crazy. The size of the torroid (the main on the arc and the only one on the C-V) alone will tell you the Arc will make more power.


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

uumm... black amps are sexier and therefor sound better... duh


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

dbphelps said:


> So to those that have a clue, the Cerwin Vegas that got liquidated are one of the biggest steals out there as YOU GET THE SAME EXACT AMP for less than 1/4 the price of those other ones USED!!!



That's our point. They are NOT the EXACT same amp. They will NOT perform the same.


----------



## phatredpt (Feb 22, 2006)

Damn...
We need someone to slap both on the test bench for us and serve up some truth...
numbers don't lie!


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

Yeah, I can see the difference in the number of windings on them. I really wish someone would post guts of an arc 4050xxk which is the counterpart to this 400.4.

Then we would have more apples to apples to look at. 

Anyone?


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

I had a 4150XXK and minus anything associated with the sub channel it looked just like the 5150XXK board. Fred might have something though. Anything on ampguts?


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

The 350.2 and 2100xxk look a little closer in windings from the pics in the link on page 1.

There are definately some differences here and there, but much the same as well. Arc for example uses metal end caps with rca's wire mounted to the board, where the CV uses directly board mounted RCAs. The number of windings on the power supply is visibly different, but without testing them we don't know that they have different output. Doesn't wire size and other specs affect the output, not just number of windings? I'm talking greek here by the way because I know not what I speak. LOL


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

quality_sound said:


> I had a 4150XXK and minus anything associated with the sub channel it looked just like the 5150XXK board. Fred might have something though. Anything on ampguts?


yeah, but the 5150 is no 4150. The 5150 is only rated to 45x4 and 190x1. The 4150 is like 85x4 isn't it?


----------



## JAX (Jun 2, 2006)

some people are getting a little to bent up about it with no nummbers to say ya or nay....

I remain open to the idea until someone runs some actual tests..


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

x2.... if they are not twins, they are definitely cousins.....





gentlejax2 said:


> some people are getting a little to bent up about it with no nummbers to say ya or nay....
> 
> I remain open to the idea until someone runs some actual tests..


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

3.5max6spd said:


> Dont quite see how Arc is 'ripping off' anyone. They basically are a retail outlet/marketeer in the US for the same buildhouse(same person that owns Ubuy, owns Arc) that manufactures these Zeff designs, nothing more, nothing less.
> 
> Now a more favorable statement would be that because Vega cant sell a product with its name anymore and it ends up being sold for a fraction of its price by online distributors, that one can buy an equally solid Zeff design for less.


x2 People are forgetting that these amps retailed for a lot more than what they can be had for now...something like 3-400...



quality_sound said:


> That's our point. They are NOT the EXACT same amp. They will NOT perform the same.


Of course not, because one is a five channel while the other is a four channel


----------



## dbphelps (Jun 30, 2006)

Fast1one said:


> Of course not, because one is a five channel while the other is a four channel


THANK YOU!

I said, he said, many have said it, stop looking at the pictures and READ!!!

Some of the long-time members around here are really showing how much of a bunch of NOOBs they really are by acting like such dopes...

If you bought an Arc, good for you... You got what you paid for...

If you got a CV at a steal of a deal, even better as you got the same for less...

I just can't believe all the nay-sayers pissing and moaning because they are butt-hurt because they didn't get one product as cheap as someone else got another because internally they are the same...

And for the record, not all brands carried all the designs, so no, there won't be a direct comparison of a 5150xxk to any Cerwin Vega, but here is the direct linkage of what IS available:

CV EXL350.2 = Arc 2100xxk/2100cxl = Zapco Reference 350.2
CV EXL400.4 = Arc 4050xxk/4050cxl = Zapco Reference 360.4
CV EXL200.2 = Arc 2050xxk/2050cxl = Zapco Reference 200.2

Now there is much more that are indentical as well, such as the Eton amps (they used surface mount for most internals), Diamond (I think thier D3 series), and the list goes on...

If people want to ***** and moan because they are butt-hurt, then so be it, but the fact remains that they ARE THE SAME... Your little hurt egos will just have to take remain bruised as reality won't change just because you spent some coin...


----------



## rekd0514 (Sep 24, 2006)

They may not be exactly the same, but like was said you most likely could never tell the dirrerence anyways. I'll take an equivalent amp for $65 shipped any day.


----------



## phatredpt (Feb 22, 2006)

Bought 1 EXL400.4 for a great price!
Hope to find a 350.2 for cheap to go with it...
Have never even considered the ARCS...
Have always wanted the Zapco Refs... (actually have a 150.2 on the shelf for tweeter duty someday... got it for a great price too)
Currently running Blau Velocity amps... got them cheap also...
So no butt pain here! 

Now if I could get rid of some of my stash of "gotta buy because they are such a good deal amps" LOL!
The others above are keepers IMHO


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> If you look at those two amps and think the parts are anywhere near comparable you're crazy. The size of the torroid (the main on the arc and the only one on the C-V) alone will tell you the Arc will make more power.


The two amps shown are a 5 channel ARC and a 4 channel CV, so yeah, they won't look exactly alike.


----------



## phatredpt (Feb 22, 2006)

Something I forgot to mention....

"Thank YOU!" 
for the pics... to the OP

Saved me from popping the hood on mine


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

phatredpt said:


> Something I forgot to mention....
> 
> "Thank YOU!"
> for the pics... to the OP
> ...



No problem. I wouldn't have done it if it meant cutting a warranty sticker, but none of them had a sticker across the panel, so I figured why not share.


If this thread keeps going though, it might talk me into just keeping the one arc 5150 and dumping the vega's. LOL It's like a tug of war...................


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

*Ok, now I really want to grab one.*


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

denim said:


> *Ok, now I really want to grab one.*


One what?


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

89grand said:


> The two amps shown are a 5 channel ARC and a 4 channel CV, so yeah, they won't look exactly alike.


No ****.  I did mention that.


----------



## BEAVER (May 26, 2007)

I'd give these a shot if they were more powerful.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

BEAVER said:


> I'd give these a shot if they were more powerful.


These what, the vegas?

How much power you looking for? Didn't you just sell a baby belle? What did you replace it with?

Me, if money was no object, I'd buy two of the 4 channel zapco competition amps and their external processor, but that's not reality for my current life, so the vegas are a bargain that keeps me off the radar screen for spending too much money on stupid car stuff............... if you don't know what I mean, you probably aren't married with kids. LOL


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

txbonds said:


> One what?


*I went after a few of the 400.4's on ubid, but got out bid in the final moments a few times. Honestly, for the install at hand, I should be running Sundowns, but the SAX-100.4 is a bit too large for the civic daily beater. The 350.2 does not seem like it will have the umph I want for sub duty testing.*


----------



## BEAVER (May 26, 2007)

txbonds said:


> These what, the vegas?
> 
> How much power you looking for? Didn't you just sell a baby belle? What did you replace it with?
> 
> Me, if money was no object, I'd buy two of the 4 channel zapco competition amps and their external processor, but that's not reality for my current life, so the vegas are a bargain that keeps me off the radar screen for spending too much money on stupid car stuff............... if you don't know what I mean, you probably aren't married with kids. LOL


I still have the Memphis. Nobody wants it...lol. 

I'm looking for 100x4 and 500x1 (or so) without having to buy 3 amps. 

I really want a PDX 4.100 and a PDX 1.600, but I'm afraid that would land me on the radar "for spending too much money on stupid car stuff."


----------



## phatredpt (Feb 22, 2006)

txbonds said:


> Me, if money was no object, I'd buy two of the 4 channel zapco competition amps and their external processor, but that's not reality for my current life, so the vegas are a bargain that keeps me off the radar screen for spending too much money on stupid car stuff............... if you don't know what I mean, you probably aren't married with kids. LOL


Amen brotha!

I understand and feel your pain!


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

txbonds said:


> These what, the vegas?
> 
> How much power you looking for? Didn't you just sell a baby belle? What did you replace it with?
> 
> Me, if money was no object, I'd buy two of the 4 channel zapco competition amps and their external processor, but that's not reality for my current life, so the vegas are a bargain that keeps me off the radar screen for spending too much money on stupid car stuff............... if you don't know what I mean, you probably aren't married with kids. LOL


*If money was no option, I would front the money for the next ZED Audio build so I could run them.  *


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

denim said:


> *I went after a few of the 400.4's on ubid, but got out bid in the final moments a few times. Honestly, for the install at hand, I should be running Sundowns, but the SAX-100.4 is a bit too large for the civic daily beater. The 350.2 does not seem like it will have the umph I want for sub duty testing.*


Ah, gottcha. For me, in a truck cab, with family use as primary duty, and basic sound listening on single sealed 10 and basic components, I'm hoping to have enough power. 

Hopefully it will. I am possibly looking for one of the vega 200.2's though for tweeter duty instead of the 350.2.

I guess if there isn't enough power to suit my tastes, I'll be swapping out amps myself, but I think my setup will be okay with the power these have. 

I'm more concerned that they have that same sound as my old school zapco's did. Not sure how to quantify it, but a system that had fast transient response, tight but deep bass, etc. Not just loud and sloppy, but very musical like a fine home setup.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

One difference I've picked up on is that the vega's use an unregulated power supply whereas I think arc uses all regulated power supplies. Not sure what the major difference would be other than variable power at increasing voltage on the vega's versus consistent power on the arcs.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> No ****.  I did mention that.


You're not making any sense. 

If you were trying to convince everyone that it was simply because they had a different number of channels, and not because one was an ARC and one was a CV, than that was completely unneccesary since we all know a 5 channel amp and a 4 channel amp would not perform the same since they don't have the same number of channels.


----------



## dbphelps (Jun 30, 2006)

txbonds said:


> One difference I've picked up on is that the vega's use an unregulated power supply whereas I think arc uses all regulated power supplies. Not sure what the major difference would be other than variable power at increasing voltage on the vega's versus consistent power on the arcs.


Nope, only *some* Arc models use regulated power supplies, just like only *some* Zapcos use regulated power supplies...

The CV and the Arcs I outlined are identical deisgns and builds, all with unregulated power supplies...


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

dbphelps said:


> Nope, only *some* Arc models use regulated power supplies, just like only *some* Zapcos use regulated power supplies...
> 
> The CV and the Arcs I outlined are identical deisgns and builds, all with unregulated power supplies...


So, will the 400.4 rated at 60x4 into 4 ohms put out more power than the 4 channel section of my 5150 rated at 45x4 into 4 ohms?

I'm so confused by this thread now, and I'm the one that started the damn thing.

I've currently gotten myself into two 400.4's, two 350.2's, and one 5150xxk. LOL And, each time I think I've got a clear path picked, I read something else that makes me think............. Boy a single 5150 sure would be easy........ Boy 3 vega's sure would be cheaper and have more power......... boy this or that or the other.......... argh..............



EDIT: Decision is getting easier as I Just sold the Arc 5150 XXK.


----------



## BEAVER (May 26, 2007)

Ust two 350.2's and one 400.4... That's what I'd do if I had your collection.

You could donate the others to me for helping you come to a decision, if you felt inclined to do so.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

89grand said:


> You're not making any sense.
> 
> If you were trying to convince everyone that it was simply because they had a different number of channels, and not because one was an ARC and one was a CV, than that was completely unneccesary since we all know a 5 channel amp and a 4 channel amp would not perform the same since they don't have the same number of channels.


No, I was saying that even if we were looking at a 4-ch Arc the Arc would STILL be better built and would perform better.


----------



## ca90ss (Jul 2, 2005)

quality_sound said:


> No, I was saying that even if we were looking at a 4-ch Arc the Arc would STILL be better built and would perform better.


Care to elaborate on how the brand name on the amp will affect the performance?


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> No, I was saying that even if we were looking at a 4-ch Arc the Arc would STILL be better built and would perform better.


I hate to say it, but we're back to square one. Back to saying the ARC badge makes it a better amp.

Can you please explain in detail, the differences between the ARC and CV amps, other than the name plate? And then explain what makes the ARC the better built and performing amp?

Don't get me wrong, I'll accept that the ARC is better once I get the explanation as to why.


----------



## JAX (Jun 2, 2006)

X3...thats exactly what I am wanting to hear...no offense but these days I am open to being informed..hell ...I am about to put that Sony 7547 back in the car since nobody wants to buy it...I never thought I would run a Sony amp but heck..its good..

open to information..open mind....


----------



## dbphelps (Jun 30, 2006)

And the vanity of name brand superiority rears it's ugly head once again...

It is obvious sound_quality is butt-hurt for the Arc brand... Hell, he isn't even smart enough to push for the Zapco reference as the 'higher-quality' name brand, as most would, he is a Arc fan-boy at heart I guess... 

Tired of re-iterating what has been stated, what has been shown and overall what everyone should conclude on thier own due to 'common sense' (here is a hint, the specs are identical for all of them as well *hint hint*)...

Gotta love people that try to build up a brand name for thier own egotistical purposes... Something smells like a$$hole in here... Oh, wait I think I hear the chanting once more, sounds reminicent of the Zuki tribe...


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

ca90ss said:


> Care to elaborate on how the brand name on the amp will affect the performance?





89grand said:


> I hate to say it, but we're back to square one. Back to saying the ARC badge makes it a better amp.
> 
> Can you please explain in detail, the differences between the ARC and CV amps, other than the name plate? And then explain what makes the ARC the better built and performing amp?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'll accept that the ARC is better once I get the explanation as to why.


It has nothing to do with the name, but the parts. Look at the parts used and tell me the c-v looks up to par.


----------



## CAMSHAFT (Apr 7, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> It has nothing to do with the name, but the parts. Look at the parts used and tell me the c-v looks up to par.


EXACTLY!!


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

quality_sound said:


> It has nothing to do with the name, but the parts. Look at the parts used and tell me the c-v looks up to par.


Parts are the same, (I took the clips off) Same as the zapco ref too, I know this because I have seen schematics.  Damn close to TRU S44 too. Just takes two 350.2's to equal ONE S44.

Just because the ARC has nicer looking RCA plugs doesn't mean much. That is cosmetic.

It's an amp guys. If it has the power you need, then there is no problem. I switched over from A/D/S PH/PQ series to these and they work great. I even picked up the XL600 for sub duty and it does exactly what it needs to without stressing the electrical system.

350.2 on each midbass, two 400.4 bridged down to run midranges and tweeters. XL600.1 for sub.


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Comparisons...

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showpost.php?p=356207&postcount=1

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showpost.php?p=364041&postcount=23

I measured the rail voltage of the transformer and it sits at around 40V just as the Zapco/old robert zeff design shows from the schematics.


----------



## ca90ss (Jul 2, 2005)

quality_sound said:


> It has nothing to do with the name, but the parts. Look at the parts used and tell me the c-v looks up to par.


Then tell us what parts are different, the difference in specs between the parts and how those differences audibly affect the sound.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

durwood said:


> Parts are the same, (I took the clips off) Same as the zapco ref too, I know this because I have seen schematics.  Damn close to TRU S44 too. Just takes two 350.2's to equal ONE S44.
> 
> Just because the ARC has nicer looking RCA plugs doesn't mean much. That is cosmetic.
> 
> ...




Holy cow, where did you mount all of them. LOL

Thats two 350.2's, two 400.4's and one xl600........... I've got four of your 5 for my install, but only planned a two way front end. Guess I could follow suit, but man I'd have to revamp my power wiring scheme and everything to do that many for the install. LOL

Guess I could do double 4 gauge for power to stay on teh cheap, and could follow your lead. LOL

But, that's way more power than I think I need.

Think I will hold onto my extra's though, so if I get a wild hair and want to grow from 2way to 3way active then I've got power. I'm probably going with a 350.2 on tweets, 400.4 bridged on mids, and 350.2 bridged on sub to start with.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

quality_sound said:


> It has nothing to do with the name, but the parts. Look at the parts used and tell me the c-v looks up to par.





CAMSHAFT said:


> EXACTLY!!


Now we can tell if an amp has better parts by looking at a picture, and then determining it performs better because of it too.

I give up.


----------



## CAMSHAFT (Apr 7, 2006)

89grand said:


> Now we can tell if an amp has better parts by looking at a picture, and then determining it performs better because of it too.
> 
> I give up.


NO the type and grade of components... IE a 25 cent cap is not going to be better than a 5 dollar one.


----------



## ca90ss (Jul 2, 2005)

CAMSHAFT said:


> NO the type and grade of components... IE a 25 cent cap is not going to be better than a 5 dollar one.


The Arc uses the same cheap caps as any of the other brands that use the same board.


Care to answer this one? 


ca90ss said:


> Then tell us what parts are different, the difference in specs between the parts and how those differences audibly affect the sound.


----------



## 89grand (Nov 23, 2006)

CAMSHAFT said:


> NO the type and grade of components... IE a 25 cent cap is not going to be better than a 5 dollar one.


The CV has 25 cent caps and the ARC has $5 caps?

I'm not buying it.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

Nikola did change their website since the last time I was there. Intersting. 

I'd love to try a few of the Arc wannabees, but they are just too big. 

Thanks durwood for keeping it real.


----------



## CAMSHAFT (Apr 7, 2006)

89grand said:


> The CV has 25 cent caps and the ARC has $5 caps?
> 
> I'm not buying it.


Don't quote me on the actual prices that was just an example....


----------



## JAX (Jun 2, 2006)

CAMSHAFT said:


> Don't quote me on the actual prices that was just an example....


and just where did you get that info? that ARCs caps in the comparible amp are much better? 

I mean if you actually know this then explain..rather than throwing out numbers(I know it was just an example) ...that we are supposed to just accept.

I am trying to get to the truth or close to it but it just doesnt seem to be happening..

if this was a matter in front of a jury and they had the case for "being the same" and the case "not close" ...the jury has more evidence to suggest "being the same" is pretty accurate...

I am looking for more than opinion...because there seems to be lots of reason the think they are same amps or damn close.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

can we just accept the fact that these exl amps just might be the "deal of the decade" and move on? the people using them seem to be really happy and that's all that matters. on top of that, no one on this forum has run them long enough to see whether or not this "arc clone" will hold up under pressure. if it does then great. if not, then we know something was skimped on. if i was in the market for a pair of amps i'd consider them. anyone know just how short my list of amp PAIRS that i'd consider running is? if i retire my xenons the pg rsd amps and jbl power series are the only PAIR i'd even consider right now.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

well, maybe my eyes are untrained, but the caps in the vega exl and the caps in the arc xxk that I opened looked the same, same coloring, same style, and as far as I could tell were the same brand. There may have been more or less in one, but they were not comparable specs since one was 4050 equivalent (exl 400.4) and other was 5150 five channel.

Regardless, other than a few simple asthetic items like exterior case, rca styles, etc, the bulk of the board mounted components appeared to be identical. If they were not, then some black market sweat shop went to a lot of trouble to color match the internal components to match when they are to be covered inside a box.......... don't buy it.

I'm pretty convinced that they are the same design and share similar, if not same, parts inside after my personal opening of the two amps.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

txbonds said:


> I'm pretty convinced that they are the same design and share similar, if not same, parts inside after my personal opening of the two amps.


You know...I hear what you are saying and I agree. I find it a little funny how these type threads ALWAYS go overboard. A designer can clearly look at the two amps and see that they are from the same or similar design....so from a class AB design standpoint, the amps circuits should be similar as opposed to comparing two amps with different designs.

As far as guys trying to compare components and such.....it really is beside the point. *The designs are very similar and all company’s are out to make a profit...so low cost Asian components are used in most car audio amps.*

Now from there....the only other thing that can be compared is the quality of the construction. Are these made in the same factory? Different factory? Are there differences there?

Lets face the truth....this is not the first...this will not be the last....this is American designed, Asian made car audio. Don't be shocked if SO called high end brands share designs that lesser brands use. Some execute it better than others and some charge much more for the same thing....get used to it and move on.


----------



## BlackSapphire (Apr 16, 2008)

Where can you buy these CV EXL amps for such a great price?


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

BlackSapphire said:


> Where can you buy these CV EXL amps for such a great price?


Search the for sale section. Just listed 4 of them for price lower than can be found even on ebay since ebay charges out the wahzoo for shipping, which brings the total charge up.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

I think the xxk arcs claimed to be "made in america" but the current arcs are made in China according to arc, so who knows, they could have been made in the same place. LOL

Either way, I think they are a bargain for the pricing, but I'm not married to them or a CV fanboy or anything. Hell, if I fell into the right price on something like an Arc KS 900.6, I'd probably go with it as a 1 shot solution over the CV's easily.




WLDock said:


> You know...I hear what you are saying and I agree. I find it a little funny how these type threads ALWAYS go overboard. A designer can clearly look at the two amps and see that they are from the same or similar design....so from a class AB design standpoint, the amps circuits should be similar as opposed to comparing two amps with different designs.
> 
> As far as guys trying to compare components and such.....it really is beside the point. *The designs are very similar and all company’s are out to make a profit...so low cost Asian components are used in most car audio amps.*
> 
> ...


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

txbonds said:


> Hell, if I fell into the right price on something like an Arc KS 900.6, I'd probably go with it as a 1 shot solution over the CV's easily.


 Well, given that an Audison LRx 5.1k is waay more than I want to spend the KS 900.6 is high on my list as well. But the cost is still a bit up there. Looks like the PDX-5 might be the all-in-one small space option?


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

After 9 pages of this, I've put my 4 vega exl's on the forum for sale section, for a better price than I paid shipped, so if anyone is interested take a look. I ended up buying OldOneEye's Rockford Fosgate 25toLife Power 1000 today with intentions to simply run a single amp, active front 2-way with sub system. It should be as much power, or slightly more, than running three vega 350.2's, but in one easy to wire case. 

So, I've changed again, leaving 4 new in the box vega EXL's to find a new home. two 400.4's and two 350.2's. LOL

At the rate I'm going, I wouldn't be surprised to see me changing it up again, but oh well.....................


----------



## ogahyellow (Apr 16, 2007)

you make me hate myself for buying mine at not this good a price. Darn it man. Free bump for you. Nice price. Lol.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

ogahyellow said:


> you make me hate myself for buying mine at not this good a price. Darn it man. Free bump for you. Nice price. Lol.


LOL

Yeah, if ebay didn't gouge you on shipping, their prices would be great, but crud shipping costs half of what they sell the amp for.

Anyone can look at my ebay profile under txbonds and see the 4 auction items where I bought these. It was no secret.

I paid $59 each for the 400.4, plus $30 shipping, so I've got about $89 in each 400.4
I paid $92.xx for each 350.2, plus $9.99 on shipping of each, so I've got about $103 in each 350.2.

So, considering it would take almost $400 to go to ebay and buy them at the reduced prices after you account for shipping, I thought my 4 amp package on the forum for sale section was pretty good.


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...%2BP%2BIA&itu=CR%2BIA%2BUCI%2BUCP&otn=3&ps=42


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

BlackSapphire said:


> Where can you buy these CV EXL amps for such a great price?


On ebay, look at the post preceding this one ^^^^^^!

They may have saved on the amount they are charging by not offerring, black color, birthsheets, {I only see one 40 amp fuse }, etc..,


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

But, if you add in shipping, they are charging $87 total each for those 400.4's which is what I was implying. Seems good on the front end, but they stick it to you on the back end with shipping.

The best price I found on the 350.2 was either $69 with $30 shipping, or $92 with $9.99 shipping. Either was about $99 to $103 shipped.


----------



## vjgli (Nov 4, 2007)

quality_sound said:


> If you look at those two amps and think the parts are anywhere near comparable you're crazy. The size of the toroid (the main on the arc and the only one on the C-V) alone will tell you the Arc will make more power.


The size can be easily manipulated by simply changing the few parts in the PWM circuit to increase or decrease the switching speed.

If you increase the switching speed x2 you can reduce the transformer by 50% or decrease the switching speed by x2 and you'd double the size of the transformer for the same amount of output power.

I personally do not know either of the amps but these are the formulas engineers use to determine the overall design. i.e. physical board size/cost/power requirement/ efficiency.

So, by simply stating the amps are different because the size of the transformer is just flat out wrong.

It's up to the designer in terms of how they wanted the amp to function/appearance.


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

lets check out the comparison between a 5 channel Clarion against the 5 channel are in a similar era






















































txbonds said:


> Arc 5150XXK


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

sorry, here are the guts


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

similar "era"


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

There you have it folks....those look pretty darn similar if not IDENTICAL to me...


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

I actually just bought this amp on ebay because I wanted to compare the guts... guy said it didn't work right, so I picked it up for $30.... I found out what the problem is, the switches that switch between bridged and stereo for the front and rear channels are not engaging properly, so it is not working right


here is the pic of the switch, got the fronts working in stereo after messing with the switch, can't get the rears to work right though


----------



## capnxtreme (Feb 5, 2008)

Nice work dude.

I don't claim to know what I'm looking at, but those are definitely the same amp. And some nice guts.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

Those aren't the same. They look nothing like each other. I mean, one says Clarion and one say's Arc.. Come on man............



fredridge said:


>





txbonds said:


>



*Just kidding* LOL Looks identical to me, even down to the power rating printed on the board. Nice find Fredrige. Would be really nice if you can get it repaired and working given the price paid.


----------



## drake78 (May 27, 2007)

They are indeed clones and sound the same.


----------



## Dr.Telepathy SQ (Nov 17, 2007)

Agreed agreed on all accounts my friends. 

The Cerwin Vega EXL's are a steal for the price. Over the years,this has been proven time and time again that companies share plateforms in car audio as well as in car/truck Platform .

But we always have those here who are always looking for a fight with limited information, or their own experiences with ONE product from a company and then claim they all must be of poor quality. As if to say,XYZ company made this amp just for lil' ol me and it didn't work well. 

I think it's funny. That's why only in America some companies can get away with rebadging a product from a house name,give it a different name, upcharge the price, thus making that product better in the consumers eyes.

Toyota Camry,Highlander,Lexus ES 300,Lexus RX 300- same Platform 

Nissan 350Z,Infiniti G35- same Platform 

Dodge Charger,Magnum,Chysler 300,-same Platform 

The big 6.75L Turbocharged V8 in Bentley Arnage/R.R. $220,000 models, that engine is Buick GM purshrod motor that dates back almost 50 years now.

I'm sure many would pass out if they knew the Mini Cooper S with the supercharged 1.6L are Chysler designed and speced engines

Arc,Cerwin Vega EXL,Clarion,....the amps spoken of here, guess what, same Robert Z Platform , and maybe sure to show up again in the future with another company build.


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

dude, not just American.. try and buy Levi's in other countries.

talked to my buddy, he has some contact solution and if not says he can replace the switches for really cheap.


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

*Does anyone have a listing of the Clarion amp model numbers that are the Zapco/Arc/CV versions? *


----------



## 3.5max6spd (Jun 29, 2005)

denim said:


> *Does anyone have a listing of the Clarion amp model numbers that are the Zapco/Arc/CV versions? *


For all Clarion models there was an arc CXL/XXK equivalent except I believe in the case of the CXL/XXK4150.


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

3.5max6spd said:


> For all Clarion models there was an arc CXL/XXK equivalent except I believe in the case of the CXL/XXK4150.


*Every one? I ask because there seems to be a number of different series APX models from Clarion.*


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

No listing, but to me the the clarion 2008 model APX490 marine amp shares same basic specs as the Arc KS 300.4


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

not all the older ones seem to have an Arc equivalent... I have been looking at different ones, but don't know which does and doesn't... we do know the apx600.5 does

now


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

*It would be interesting to find out which build runs were Arc/Zapco equivalents. *


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

denim said:


> *It would be interesting to find out which build runs were Arc/Zapco equivalents. *


*Arc KS 300.4*
Power output RMS @ 4 ohms 4 x 90 watts 
Power output RMS @ 2 ohms 4 x 175 watts 
Power output RMS @ 4 ohms bridged 2 x 350 watts 
Transient Distortion (100 watts) <.02% @ 4 ohms 
Frequency Response 20Hz - 20 KHz 
Signal to Noise Ratio >95dB 
Bass Boost [email protected] 
Crossover (Butterworth) 55Hz - 5.5 KHz variable 12dB 
Fuse 30A x 3 
Size 13.0"(L) x 8.0"(W) x 2 3/8"(H) 

*Clarion APX490M*
90W x 4 into 4 Ohms, 20Hz - 50kHz @ <.1%THD
180W x 4 into 2 Ohms, 20Hz - 50kHz @ <.1% THD
Variable Bass Extender, 0 - 15dB @ 45Hz
Adjustable -12db/Oct. High/Low Pass Crossover, 55Hz - 550Hz (Rear 55 - 550Hz, 550Hz - 5.5kHz)
Mixed Mode Operation
Conformal Coated Double Sided PCB
Non-Corrosive Aluminum Heat Sink
Dimensions 15-1/4" x 9-1/8" x 2-1/4"

*Clarion APX4361*
160W x 4 into 2 Ohms, @ < 0.2% THD
90W x 4 into 4 Ohms, @ < 0.05% THD
Mixed Mode Operation
Input Voltage Sensing
Precise Frequency Control
Variable Bass Boost; 0-15dB @ 45Hz
Independant Front / Rear Adjustable - 12db/Oct. High/Low Pass Crossovers, 55Hz-600Hz or 530Hz-5.8kHz with the Crossover Frequency Multiplier
Gold Plated Connectors; RCA/ Speaker/ Power
Speaker Level Input
Dimensions 12-1/4" x 10-1/8" x 2-3/8"


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

*Nice, that is a start! *


----------



## elminster (Jan 9, 2007)

yeah I was gonna grab that 5 channel clarion, I was pretty sure it was an arc clone but the wife veto'd it as usual


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

Looks like all the doubters have disappeared


----------



## hawkfan (May 1, 2006)

Fast1one said:


> Looks like all the doubters have disappeared


That's because there is nothing left to doubt. Threads like these are the reason I still frequent this board. It's about truth and hard facts rather than brand name bias and opinion. You still get some resistance every now and then, but the truth seems to always win out around here. On any other board this thread possibly gets locked and/or deleted for reasons only known to the mods. I love this place.


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

hawkfan said:


> That's because there is nothing left to doubt. Threads like these are the reason I still frequent this board. It's about truth and hard facts rather than brand name bias and opinion. You still get some resistance every now and then, but the truth seems to always win out around here. On any other board this thread possibly gets locked and/or deleted for reasons only known to the mods. I love this place.


Agreed...truth is gold...I was just messing with the doubters


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

*For a quality 5 channel amp that APX looks promising. Wonder who has any left.*


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

a quick update on the one I picked up

I used some contact spray on the switches and though they are still can be touchy the amp works great and is currently in the suburban running all 5 channels


----------



## Biowaste (Apr 25, 2008)

Well, thanks to this thread, I decided to jump on one of the 4 channel versions of the EXL amps! Hell, for about $50 ($30 shipping *puke*) what's not to like?

Right now I'm running an old school MTX Thunder 4320 on a single 10" and some 6.5" components up front. I'll be sure and post my thoughts when I get it installed.

Thanks again for this thread,
-Bio


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

Biowaste said:


> Well, thanks to this thread, I decided to jump on one of the 4 channel versions of the EXL amps! Hell, for about $50 ($30 shipping *puke*) what's not to like?
> 
> Right now I'm running an old school MTX Thunder 4320 on a single 10" and some 6.5" components up front. I'll be sure and post my thoughts when I get it installed.
> 
> ...



No problem. Funny thing is that I'm the one that started the thread, and that had 4 of the CV EXL's, and now I have Arc's. LOL

Go figure, but I fell for the specs and design of the 4150 arc, which didn't have an EXL equivalent.


----------



## machinehead (Nov 6, 2005)

I remember when this surfaced about the clarion amps a while ago, someone got ahold of the arc and clarion and was not too fond of the clarion.

Anyone willing to get both and test them?


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

machinehead said:


> I remember when this surfaced about the clarion amps a while ago, someone got ahold of the arc and clarion and was not too fond of the clarion.
> 
> Anyone willing to get both and test them?


It was probably either

A. Placebo or
B. Different designs all together


----------



## sundownz (Apr 13, 2007)

So, were those CV amps on close-out sale or what ?

The e-bay price I still see on amps floating around is under the build cost.


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

sundownz said:


> So, were those CV amps on close-out sale or what ?
> 
> The e-bay price I still see on amps floating around is under the build cost.


The ones I had and sold came from ebay. Same sellers that still seem to have them. I honestly should have just kept them, but too late for that now, as they are already gone and replaced.


----------



## cybercrxt (May 16, 2008)

Let me tell you, the EXL amps are the real deal. I just bought 2- 400.4's, one for my 2 door integra, and one for my wifes 4 door integra. I have all ARC stuff in my 02 Tacoma, and the EXL's are definately ARC amps and quality inside. I am running the 400.4 bridged to 2 channel in my integra, and it is very strong, and lots of headroom. I highly recommend them to anyone. Mike


----------



## ogahyellow (Apr 16, 2007)

meh. Buyer beware, the crossover on the 400.4 is not all its cracked up to be. Only the rear channels (3&4) has an x10 frequency multiplier. The range on the fronts (1&2) is about 30hz to 550 IIRC (it's not right in front of me--I'm taking a study break). So no running it normal or bridging it to midranges with a LP on the top end, and no bridging it to tweeters period. Well without an external cross that is...

And another thing, this amp gets hella hot, and it has no fan.


----------



## fliplyricist1 (May 27, 2008)

Wow, I can't believe I missed this thread.

So say, for a EXL400.4, how would it compare SQ wise to something like a dls A4? I mean, what comperable amps are out there sq wise? For this price, I think I may just get 2 exl's and sell off my 'expensive' equipment and keep the change...


----------



## cybercrxt (May 16, 2008)

Thats a good comment about the crossovers. I am using passives on the mids and tweets, and using the Eclipse CD4000's HPF at 80hz, so I bypass all the crossover stuff. As far as needing a fan, not many Arc's came with fans..only the larger ones, so I would not worry to much about the heat. If the heatsink is hot, its doing its job. Mike


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

ogahyellow said:


> meh. Buyer beware, the crossover on the 400.4 is not all its cracked up to be. Only the rear channels (3&4) has an x10 frequency multiplier. The range on the fronts (1&2) is about 30hz to 550 IIRC (it's not right in front of me--I'm taking a study break). So no running it normal or bridging it to midranges with a LP on the top end, and no bridging it to tweeters period. Well without an external cross that is...
> 
> And another thing, this amp gets hella hot, and it has no fan.


STill works great for a 3 way or 4 way system if you have two amps.

Use 400.4 channels 3&4 to high pass your tweet.
Use second 400.4 channels 3&4 to low pass your mid combined with head unit to high pass your mid
Use first 400.4 channels 1&2 to Low pass your mid/bass combined with head unit to high pass your mid/bass
Use second 400.4 channels 1&2 to low pass your sub

or

Use 400.4 channels 3&4 to high pass your tweet.
Use 350.2 to drive your mids with low pass combined with head unit to do high pass
Use 400.4 channels 1&2 to low pass your sub

or

etc.

Lots of options if you really want to do it, and you want to use the amp. Just not an all in one soution unfortunately for active setup with single 400.4.


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

txbonds said:


> Just not an all in one soution unfortunately for active setup with single 400.4.


*That was the one bugaboo for me.*


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

denim said:


> *That was the one bugaboo for me.*


Now that I have a head unit capable of doing the xovers though, the EXL's are mocking me for not keeping them.


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

txbonds said:


> Now that I have a head unit capable of doing the xovers though, the EXL's are mocking me for not keeping them.


*True, as they would have been fine for me being run off the 880prs.*


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

denim said:


> *True, as they would have been fine for me being run off the 880prs.*


As my badge of shame for not keeping them, I've decided to make my avatar a shot of the EXL400.4 board as a reminder to myself. LOL


----------



## Aaron Clinton (Oct 17, 2006)

txbonds said:


> As my badge of shame for not keeping them, I've decided to make my avatar a shot of the EXL400.4 board as a reminder to myself. LOL


*You are taking it harder then me. Heck, even our distributor is wiped out of them.*


----------



## txbonds (Mar 10, 2008)

denim said:


> *You are taking it harder then me. Heck, even our distributor is wiped out of them.*


You can still get them on ebay, and still for a reasonbly good price. The shipping sucks, but if you buy 2 or 3 at once, the shipping averages down since they combine shipping.


----------



## Fast1one (Apr 6, 2007)

ogahyellow said:


> meh. Buyer beware, the crossover on the 400.4 is not all its cracked up to be. Only the rear channels (3&4) has an x10 frequency multiplier. The range on the fronts (1&2) is about 30hz to 550 IIRC (it's not right in front of me--I'm taking a study break). So no running it normal or bridging it to midranges with a LP on the top end, and no bridging it to tweeters period. Well without an external cross that is...
> 
> And another thing, this amp gets hella hot, and it has no fan.


Mine is cool to the touch, all channels bridged for my pair  Bad ground? Gains too high?


----------



## Biowaste (Apr 25, 2008)

I got the EXL-400.4 today and here is my initial impressions.

_Disclaimer_ - I'm no pro, expert, nor a competitor, just an avid music-lover who enjoys good sound in my car. I can't compare it to high-end amps because I've never listened to any of them before. 

*System* - Alpine CDA-7930, AudioControl Three.1, 6.5" RSD comps in doors up front, 10" Round Solobaric sealed in the trunk.

*Compare* - Before, I was running an old school MTX Thunder 4320 (40 x 4 @ 4 ohms, but more like 85 x 4 with the car running).

*Test CD's* - Loreena McKennitt "The Book of Secrets", Nightwish "Dark Passion Play", Nile "Ithyphallic", Novembre "The Blue".

*Sound* - Popped in the Loreena McKennitt and played "Skellig". Great song, very mellow and the CV sounded very similar to the MTX. Not a lot going on in the song, her voice, faint voilin, acoustic guitar, bass guitar, faint atmostpheric keys. Fantastically produced CD, probably has a lot to do with the quality of this one.

Next, Nightwish, song "Amaranth" - immediately noticed the cymbals were more precise and smooth. The kick drum slightly punchier and a bit more powerful. After that Nile and Novembre, which presented the same subtle differences as the Nightwish, though not quite as obvious.

*Pros* - Price, around $80 shipped (eBay), can't beat the value. This amp sounds slightly better than the MTX, which I paid nearly 3 times as much for, 10 years ago. Highs are more crisp and lows were more pronounced, a very clean sounding amp which seemed to tighten up the mix from high to low frequencies (middle stayed about the same). I'm very happy with how it sounds and it would be perfectly suitable pushing a set of components up front with a bridged sub on the rear channels for you non-bass heads like me. The CV logo lights up (I like this!  - After seeing those serious, black MTX's for about 10 years, who wouldn't..?).

*Cons* - The amp seemed to add an ever so slight noise into the front speakers. It's very faint, won't hear it on the road, but it's there. Though, I won't put this past my shoddy installation skills. 

Color me impressed! I'll probably end up getting a 350.2 just to have a matching set.

Hope this helps with any of you guys decisions to pick one up,
-Bio

Edit to add that I am not using the built in crossovers. I'm using the passives that were included with the RSD's and the 90hz lowpass from the Three.1.


----------



## nigelquest (Aug 12, 2009)

Sorry to bump an old thread but can his amp be found anywhere for under $130 shipped? Thanks.


----------



## danssoslow (Nov 28, 2006)

nigelquest said:


> Sorry to bump an old thread but can his amp be found anywhere for under $130 shipped? Thanks.


Yes.


----------



## nigelquest (Aug 12, 2009)

Thanks. Thats the one I was watching, but missed that it went on sale. Went ahead and picked one up.


----------

