How do Dunlavys compared to new stuff?

Hello Meadowman,

I have found that even though the SCIV's are a relatively low impedence speaker, that because their impedence is very flat and not all over the map that they present a pretty easy load for amplifiers. The key is to use an amplifier with an excellent circuit design, powersupply, and outstanding transformers to give you the "quality" of watts, not necessarily the "quantity" of watts (within reason of course).

I have tried in the past a 50 watt Class A solid state design by Forte, a division of the Threshold Company. It did a fine job and was one of the better sounding solid state amps I've heard.

I am currently using a single ended triode amp using 845 Transmitting Directly Heated Triodes that gives me 37 watts rms with peaks of over 70 watts that to my ears sound simply amazing. It does not sound syrupy, or colored at all. The frequencies are not rolled off, in fact this amps response is capable of -3db from 6 Hz - 35 kHz. With this amplifier, the sound fills the air with a harmonic density that reminds you of real acoustic instruments being played. Piano, tenor sax, cellos, acoustic double bass, etc sound very, very real. I say this because I not only listen to live unamplified music several times a week, but I also am a musician. I play tenor and bass trombones as well as the cello. If the quality of the recording is there, the sound is goosebump real.

These speakers are capable of dynamics that sound natural, they throw a convincing soundstage with instruments and bodies that sound lifelike. As large as these speakers are, they are capable of disappearng. The bass that they have will reproduce an acuoustic bass with excellent pitch definition and without sounding boomy or one notish at all.

These descriptions are from listening to acoustic jazz, vocals, and classical music thru my equipment and with my ears. I am not a rocker or head banger, so I'm not sure how they will sound with rock, rap, etc. but the SCIV's can play full symphonic orchestral music very loudly with an excellent sense of dynamic scale.

I love the sound of this 845 amp on these speakers. Now if you have a huge room, you may want more power, but then I'd also rather opt for the SCV's then as well.

I have also used a custom made EL84 amp giving me a very potent 15 watts of push/pull. They sounded very nice and quite dynamic, especially the micro dynamics, but will run out of steam for the most demanding of full symphonic crescendos. They did very admirable though with simple music.

These speakers are very revealing and very transparent. If you put a hard or sterile sounding amp on them, that is how they will sound. If you put a warm, syrupy, slow lathargic amp on them, that is how they will sound. So be fore warned. They can handle a lot of power, but it is not needed if you have a quality amp and do not have a carnevous room to play them in.

I hope this helps a little.

Sounds_Real,

We are talking about a similar speaker. The SC-IVA was John's response to the reviews and customer reactions to the original SC-IV. The A went significantly lower in the bass dept. due to different woofers and crossover changes as well. Still, the speaker is not a true full range design. I have heard many pairs of IVs in the original, improved and A designation and not one of them had real usable bass much past 35 hz and in most rooms the 40hz range was more common.
More to the point, how does a speaker that focuses on frequency response and extension at the extremes fail to serve the music? Please do not get me wrong, I have heard more exciting mid range and more well defined imaging in other speakers but to MY EARS* the SC-IV gets so much right and does so little wrong that it not only stands up to today's designs, I feel it would be really hard to find any current speaker that holds a candle to the SC-IV or SC-IVA at anything close to their cost when new, let alone used pricing.
The great thing about the audio gig is the fact that we are all listening with our own ideas of what is good and correct and pleases us. I am so glad we have made it out of the "Specs are Everything" era. Remember when manufacturers claimed .0005 % THD and that was supposed to be all we needed to know about an amplifier?
If you are not pleased by the Dunlavy's that is more than just OK. That is part and parcel what makes this hobby/addiction so darn much fun.

*YMMV

Like many have said: Equal or usually surpassing new stuff regardless of price range. YMMV a bit but not by much! In my electronics have come and gone but my Dunlavy Vs and IVs sig remain. Just about recently, i have found electronics as capable as my Dunlavy's. I also have kept my IIs sig and Is sig. Don't that "use of old design, low quality speakers, lack of high tech materials, blah blah mumbo jumbo" fool you. If you can manage, get at least IVs. At the used prices that would one the greatest bargain in audio!

A very interesting set of responses and there is no doubt that speakers like the IV's still make beautiful music. But the reality is they ARE dated. They do not possess that quickness, resolution and dynamics of some todays great speakers and I do think the inexpensive drivers are part of the issue. Go listen to the likes of Green Mountain Audio or Merlin and then tell me that speakers have not evolved a LOT since the Dunlavys.
Saying that, there is still no question that they remain very good speakers and a great value. But I could say the same of many fine speakers. I recently spent time with Spica TC-60s and Snell JIII's and they were still very impressive.

Rob

I also own the SC4s, and have from almost the time they originally appeared. One significant improvement to mine occured when I freed the internal driver wires from those nasty clips, cut off the splayed ends, tightly wound the newly bared ends and soldered them to the drivers where the clips had previously resided. This resulted in a smoother and more musical/relaxed sound in the treble range(YMMV). Otherwise, I concur with those who cite the flexibility in tailoring the sound of their Dunlavys with different associated equipment. For example, changing the tubes alone in my Air Tight ATM-3 monoblock amps made a very considerable difference in regard to projecting a soundstage of impressive breadth as well as imparting a greater sense of fullness to instrumental voices. I've had very few if any misgivings about the Dunlavys.