First Exodus Digital Amp Officially Available

zybar · « **Reply #20 on:** 14 May 2004, 04:45 pm »

Ok, just had a nice talk with Kevin and I am going to try a pair of the amps with the upgraded Cardas binding posts.

I will use the pair in a bi-amp config with my RM 40's (one stereo amp per speaker).

Looks like I should have the amps in early June.

I will be directly comparing them to my Rowland 201 monos.

George

Kevin P · « **Reply #21 on:** 14 May 2004, 04:58 pm »

Thanks George.... this should be a great comparison. I'll be interested in seeing how it plays out, as obviously the Rowland is a good benchmark for us to aim at and the RM 40 is an ideal candidate for this amplifier.

ghersh · « **Reply #22 on:** 14 May 2004, 07:30 pm »

Quote from: Kevin P

Thanks George.... this should be a great comparison. I'll be interested in seeing how it plays out, as obviously the Rowland is a good benchmark for us to aim at and the RM 40 is an ideal candidate for this amplifier.

Frankly, I think benchmarking this amp against some of the 'true class A amplifiers' would be more interesting, in particular, because the original posting mentions this amp as 'Class A competitor'.

The whole class D design is a bit controversial, in terms how does it sound vs the traditional class A and A/B design. I've been contemplating getting class A (like Monarchy Audio) , but of course wouldn't mind switching to class D given it's comparable with class A. I assume other people contemplating switch from A or A/B to D would be interested in such comparison as well -- rather than in comparing with other class D amps (like IcePower based Rowland, or Spectron). Of course, efficient operations of class D is a big plus and well as very low self-noise, but ultimately it's about music rather than the size of your electric bill.

Regards.

zybar · « **Reply #23 on:** 14 May 2004, 07:41 pm »

Well, I am in the process of selling my class A 100 watt triode tube amps. So you can say that the Rowland 201's were more than capable of sounding as good or better than a class A designed amp.

Outside of some of the magic that tubes do (in terms of texture and harmonics), the 201's are superior in every area.

I also compared the 201's to a Pass x250 and Horsehead compared the 201's to a Pass x350. Both Pass designs are either heavy into Class A or full Class A.

George

Horsehead · « **Reply #24 on:** 14 May 2004, 09:51 pm »

George- are the upgraded Cardas posts the same as on the 201s? Do you get any of the other options listed on the website? Should make for a great comparison.

Frank

zybar · « **Reply #25 on:** 14 May 2004, 10:27 pm »

Kevin,

Can you remind me which model Cardas binding posts are the upgrade?

Will they accept banana as well as spades?

George

Rocket · « **Reply #26 on:** 15 May 2004, 12:43 am »

Hi,

If i hadn't invested so much money into my amps and other products i'd be tempted to purchase the kit.

Ghersh, i've tried class a amps but there main problem is that they lack dynamics when compared to a class d or class a/b amplifier. I love the top end of a good quality class a amp but for my personal tastes dynamics is also a high priority.

Good luck though with your search.

regards

rocket

bubba966 · « **Reply #27 on:** 16 May 2004, 06:43 pm »

Any plans on making a version with more than 2 channels of power?

Kevin P · « **Reply #28 on:** 17 May 2004, 03:06 am »

Quote from: zybar

Kevin,

Can you remind me which model Cardas binding posts are the upgrade?

Will they accept banana as well as spades?

George

I stock every binding post that Cardas sells. We can build the amps with any that your desire but the ones we talked about where the CCGR-S. They accept bananas and they are about the top of the line in terms of Cardas parts.

Kevin P · « **Reply #29 on:** 17 May 2004, 03:08 am »

Quote from: bubba966

Any plans on making a version with more than 2 channels of power?

Yes... up to 5-channel this year.

stvnharr · « **Reply #30 on:** 17 May 2004, 03:35 am »

Hello,
In November 2002 I had a nice audition of one of the earliest Rowland 201's. This was before they were designated 201. At that time I had heard about, but never heard the Acoustic Reality EAR amps, and did not know of any other amp using the Ice Power amp module.

The Rowland amp was unbelievable. All the power in the world with no distortion and running ice cold. The speakers in this audition were VA Mahlers, and we played them loud.
Of course as one is stunned by the clean clear sound, one can also be "stunned" by the high clear price of the amp.

The Exodus gotta be a winner!

Be interesting to hear the results of a direct comparison. Hopefully not too much influence of a 1k amp vs. a 15k amp.

zybar · « **Reply #31 on:** 17 May 2004, 03:54 am »

Kevin,

What do you think of the CPBP-CRS vs. CCGR-S?

I really like the CPBP-CRS on my Rowland 201's (nice and easy to get on and off).

Thanks,

George

bubba966 · « **Reply #32 on:** 17 May 2004, 08:14 am »

Quote from: Kevin P

Quote from: bubba966
Any plans on making a version with more than 2 channels of power?

Yes... up to 5-channel this year.

How 'bout a 7-channel?

Or are there still too few people running 7-channel setups for that to be a viable option?

Kevin P · « **Reply #33 on:** 17 May 2004, 01:34 pm »

Quote from: zybar

Kevin,

What do you think of the CPBP-CRS vs. CCGR-S?

I really like the CPBP-CRS on my Rowland 201's (nice and easy to get on and off).

Thanks,

George

I like the CPBP but they won't fit. There is a center bolt that holds the post in place along with the wheel for tightening them down and the chassis has to be cut for that part.

Kevin P · « **Reply #34 on:** 17 May 2004, 01:39 pm »

Quote from: bubba966

Quote from: Kevin P
Quote from: bubba966
Any plans on making a version with more than 2 channels of power?

Yes... up to 5-channel this year.

How 'bout a 7-channel?

Or are there still too few people running 7-channel setups for that to be a viable option?

Probably too little demand. The current chassis fits 5 units without a problem but we would have to rearrange the layout to fit 7 units. It isn't a real technical problem but as you state... probably more of a problem of demand.

zybar · « **Reply #35 on:** 17 May 2004, 01:43 pm »

Thanks for the reply Kevin.

That's too bad.

George

klh · « **Reply #36 on:** 18 May 2004, 03:06 am »

So what would it take to get it to be a 7-channel amp?

Kevin P · « **Reply #37 on:** 18 May 2004, 03:27 pm »

Quote from: klh

So what would it take to get it to be a 7-channel amp?

A larger transformer, power supply, two extra modules and the appropriate input/outputs on the rear panel. I'd also syncronize all 7 modules to the same frequency.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #38 on:** 19 May 2004, 05:13 am »

Kevin,

Kevin P · « **Reply #39 on:** 19 May 2004, 02:23 pm »

Quote from: lonewolfny42

Kevin,
How much time do you estimate between placing the order and delivery of the Exodus amp ? Thanks. [/list:u]

At the moment there is about a 2 week delay between ordering and shipping. I hope to get it to less than a week delay by mid-summer.