• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Dynaco 25 vs AR 4x - any experience?

I have the AR4x's and have had the Dynaco A-25's. I had to let the A-25's go because of mold in the cabinet that I was sensitive to. The A25's were, to me, the better speaker with a deeper bottom end and a clearer sounding top end. The AR4x's seemed to be a bit more efficient than the Dynacos and were very happy with my Dynaco SCA-35 integrated amplifier putting out 17.5 watts/channel. The Dynacos were happier with amplifiers running 35 watts and up per channel. After I replaced the tweeter volume controls on the AR's with new units the top end sounded better. I also have KLH 6's and the AR4x's sound very much like them, although the KLH's have an extra octave of bass. So, summing up, the differences are subtle and the condition of the speakers is important in determining which model is best, but I think the A-25 is the leader here.
 
So- what's the score here?

Sounds like the Dynaco is-

1) better on the top end

2) produces deeper, richer bass

but...

3) bass is not as controlled and tight


The AR4x is-

1) tight, rich and well controlled in the bass region

but-

2) not as deep, and

3) a bit harsh to some folk's ears in the upper register.


To be fair, factor in age and condition of the speakers, and your room interactions to make it a fair fight and also to decide what works best for you.

Despite the better top end, the Dynacos didn't work well in my room.
 
audiojones said:
I do agree that the AR 4x can be kind of screechy or harsh.
Click to expand...

The 4 series prior to the 4xa had this annoying tendency to force you to choose between highs that were kind of "beamy" at the normal tweeter setting and required you to remain in a relatively restricted "sweet spot" compared to its big brothers with the dome tweeters, or highs that bloomed out but became "screechy" when you turned up the pots. This was fixed with the cone/dome combo tweeter that was introduced on the AR-6 and later fitted to the 4 to make the 4xa. The same tweeter was used in the AR-7, AR-8 and the MST. No longer available, of course.

This one looks like it might be interesting to try in an old 4:

http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=112

It would almost certainly require some kind of crossover mod.
 
So, i got both of them. They are both in nice shape, sound good to my ears AND the seller was a really nice guy with amazing collection of speakers etc. For that alone it was well worth the 1/2 hour trip.
Will report on my experience soon.
 
sancho22 said:
So, i got both of them. They are both in nice shape, sound good to my ears AND the seller was a really nice guy with amazing collection of speakers etc. For that alone it was well worth the 1/2 hour trip.
Will report on my experience soon.
Click to expand...

Seems you came to the conclusion a lot of us come to...just get them both! You can never have too many speakers, until the stacks of them fall on you I guess.
 
Getting both was the best solution! :thmbsp: You can now listen to both at your leisure, compare them as often and as much as you like, and if you finally decide you prefer one to the other, sell the one you don't like as much.

Reading this thread, I was surprised at how evenly split the opinions seemed to be. I have the 4x speakers (why do I want to write 4ax?!). I do NOT have A25s, but have heard them before. I would have expected the A25s to be the hands-down winners, and would have thought the AR-2ax speakers would have been a fairer comparison... but I guess I over-rated the A25s. Maybe I should feel better, then, about never having gotten a pair! (I've only ever seen/heard the one pair!)

I think I'll eventually give up all my ARs for just one pair of 3as, anyway.
 
I don't find the AR-4x to be screechy or harsh but rather laid back with rolled off highs. I alway thought the 2ax cone driver was always used for the 4x...maybe I dont have a 4x? It looks like the Dynaco's come out on top to me:D
 
Last edited:
tubed said:
I don't find the AR-4x to be screechy or harsh but rather laid back with rolled off highs. I alway thought the 2ax cone driver was always used for the 4x...maybe I dont have a 4x? It looks like the Dynaco's come out on top to me:D
Click to expand...
The damping material in front of the tweeter is there to tame the sound some describe as "screechy/harsh." Most photos I've seen of the 4x don't have this, but that doesn't necessarily mean there were never any that did. If the label is gone, the only way to tell is to open it up and look at the component part numbers and crossover.
 
As I understand it (and I could be wrong) the original AR4 used a different tweeter and crossover point (8mfd). When it became the 4x, a new tweeter that could handle a lower crossover point was installed and the crossover cap was changed to 22 mfd. I believe the woofer inductor value was changed as well, shifting the crossover points and allowing a lower F for the woofer. The new tweeter and crossover cap picked up where the woofer now left off. The old tweeter that used to be in the AR4 became the midrange for the AR2ax to replace the 2 CTS manufactured 5" midranges that were in the original AR2a. Fiberglass and a mesh screen were incorporated into what would now be the AR2ax mid driver to cut down on the forwardness of the old 4 tweeter. In the AR2 (a budget 2 way system) the old AR4 tweeter was used as the tweeter, although it still used the fiberglass and mesh damping. The tweeter in the 4x is not the same as the mid in the 2ax as far as I know.

*CORRECTION* I think the original AR4 had the fiberglass and mesh on the tweeter from the beginning, and that it was not added when it became the AR2ax midrange as I stated. Again, I could be wrong here but that was my understanding.
 
Last edited:
I like a tighter bass response. Having never heard the A 25's and growing up with AR 4's I would like to hear them and make a comparison. I do however judge all speakers to how AR's sound. I used to have a set of Infinity RS speakers with a 6-1/2" woofer and those things were really nice for their size.

There is nothing like acoustic suspension. I do like my ARxp62's though but they don't compare with 4's. I myself like a higher sounding tweeter to reproduce the cymbals.
 
Having nevr heard the 4's, and even being a huge AR fan, my money's on the Dynaco's :banana:

I like my 2AX better than my A25's. So if the 4's match them I'll be impressed and will have to start looking for a pair.
 
Now we are drifting a bit from the original question BUT....
The AR 2aX doesn't need to be compared to the 4X the 2aX is supposed to be better! A 10 inch 3 way compared to a budget 8 inch 2 way, no race! It may be better to compare the 2aX to the A-25 but that would put us even farther away from the OP question.

In my opinion, the nod goes to the Dynaco but not by leaps and bounds like some might think. The observations already made are well taken. The AR has a more obvious bass (because of the air suspension design I suppose) than the Dynaco but the Dynaco more than makes up for it in midrange clarity and high frequency detail. That being said, however, the bass on the A-25 is kind of sneaky. If the music calls for it and you have a good match with your amp, the A-25 will project some nice bass!

I'm afraid we have all become somewhat bass hungy addits. The newer music especially has a lot of low end dynamics and we start to crave it. That is why I run my Dynacos and my AR 4x's with a sub in the mix. The A-25's respond to the subs help especially well because you can still hear THEM inspite of the bass reinforcement. I don't get extreme with the sub just a little extra bottom to sweeten the mix!

By the way, this was a timely post for me. I just recently recapped my first speakers. A pair of 4x's and one pair of the A-25's I have. The 4X was a complete restore including removing and cleaning the level controls and replacing the rockwool. They both woke up and they both sounded great but just in a little different way.

The AR 4x's just cry out vintage! Even more so than the Dynacos. They are just more historic to me. However, if someone gave me a choice of one or the other to listen to forever it would be the A-25's especially if I could keep the sub too! Good luck! Franksta
 
Just dragged home a pair of AR-4s (no 'A', no 'X'). As they cost me a mere $5, I'm not averse to some mods... obviously the controls must go (they feel like there's SAND inside...), but is there a low cost tweeter upgrade?
 
OK I ended up with both (of course). I do think that the AR 4 x sound better to my ears. I have to keep in mind though taht tehy have SEAS tweeters not the originals. I do find that the Dynaco has some more lower end and is sort smoother overall, but also a bit vailed (not sure I am correct in my description here)?
I also heard EPI 100 - to me those beat both the AR and the Dynaco - again to my ears. I am not talking about head to head precise listening test. My EPI 180 blows both of these out of the water - for me again. I also recognize that the EPI 180 is not a fair comparison but ADS 570 might be and I again preefr the 570. Still both the Dynaco and the AR are fun and will keep them - at least for a while.
 
To my ears the A-25 woofer does not go as deep and is definitely boomier so the bass appears to sound louder. The 4X does not boom so bass guitars and drums sound natural with full reproduction of the fundamental note.
 
I stand corrected - after listening to them again I have to admit that the AR 4 does go deeper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom