Thiel 3.6 vs. Dunlavy SC-IV/A

The size of the room seems to me to be a limiting factor. I briefly auditioned Dunlavy IV-A speakers at a dealer and they did sound very good indeed. The only comparison point I have to Thiels, however, are to my 3.5s, which I have had many years now. Hardly a valid comparison, since there are too many years between these two designs and too much difference size-wise. I, also, would be interested in getting Dunlavy IV-As but do seriously wonder about the size of the room required. Every one seems to agree that, unlike most speakers I have ever heard, they benefit from being on the long wall, with plenty of room between the speakers, as well as between each speaker and their respective side wall. Not much of a possibility in my room. What is the downside of placing them at the end of the room, on the shorter wall and listening from a good distance to, hopefully, avoid the problems associated with multi-driver speakers in the configuration chosen by Dunlavy? BTW my room is 12'X 25'. The bad part is that, since it is a split level house, the front half of my room is only 7'8" high, the rear half is fractionally above 8'. I have quite a bit of acoustic treatment on the side walls and above the speakers at present. In closing, although not an indispensable attribute or any form of guaranty sound-wise, the Thiels win the knuckle rap test; the back panel of the Dunlavy sounding especially live. The Thiels have better cabinets overall. Another point, a few months ago, in response to my inquiry, the manufacturer indicated to me that the five year warranty on Dunlavy speakers is no longer transferable. Another point where Thiel is significantly better: their warranty being ten years and, the last time I checked, transferable. Thanks.

hello the downside when placing the Dunleavy speakers with their backs along the short wall is in my opinion is total BS, as long as they are six feet plus apart and 3 feet from the side walls. I never have heard a Dunleavy set up their recommended placement which I liked before. I owned the model 5 and 4 currently. I have wall to wall sound stage width sometimes wider in my 20x23x8 room with the speakers placed approximately 60 inches from the side walls the speakers approximately 7 1/2 feet apart and 7 feet from the wall behind to the front of the speakers.

Wow I don,t know if I qualify having a pair of SC4a,s highly modified but all share my findings with you.
I find the Dunlavys to be highly accurate with a soundstage that well grow and grow with the better ass. equipment one feeds them. I have had them set up in room,s 12x32x10. Speaker,s placed 7ft aprt 3ft.side wall and 5.7ft from the front. At the time it sounded Hi-Fi. At the time I weas running Wadia 861; Pass labs x350. Ic,s were Synergistic Desinger,s ref and matching speaker cable.
The sound was very Hi-Fi. Dry ,and univolving but large deep soundstage.
I then switched to Nordost Quatra-fil and SPM speaker. Big improvement in the soundstage and seperation of people place and things but a tad bright.
I then sold the Pass and grabed a pair of Papworth Audio M200,s. (240 watt tu be monos.) Soundstage and depth of the soundstage tripled,absolutely stagering improvement. Don,t believe anyone who siad,s Dunlavys can,t be driven by tubes. They sound their best with tubes.
I then moved to a roon of 18x15x8ft. The Dunlavys to me sound there best with large seperation between the speakers,
My qurent set up is 12ft apart 38inches off the sides and 46inches off the front, My room is heavily treated with room lenses and absortion panels. Great big and deep soundstage lifelike. I found I could still not stand the bright, thin Nordost cable and tried the Stealth Ultimate Ribbon speaker cable, yes tube amps love ribbon speaker cables. And Jena labs Fugue IC. And had all cabling Cyro treated from Jena.This proceadure greatly improves all area of PRAT.
Although my room is not large the Dunlavys have never sounded there best at this time, tom. is another day.
I have heard many Dunlavys in all diff. setting and ass. equipment. All have sounded there best widely sep.
My findings at this time is given off a system driven off a 15ft. extension cord and a non-dedicated line. I was expecting a package from Jena labs today with a pair of Symphony IC. And 20amp. switch.10g.stranded romenex and a hospital grade outlet all cyro treaded and waiting for instalation. Given the improvement from cyro treatment I,m expecting big improvement in the Dunlavys.
I also think the argument between copper and silver is manufacture dependent.These are diff. questions but all have done nothong but improve the sound of my Dunlavys.
Having heard the Theil 5 some years ago It was not my cup of tea. I,m sure it was equipment and or set up, Theil has a great reputation and therefore must be given great respect in this hobby that doesent put up with High priced shit.
The answer to your question is not easy for anyone, But weather you stick with your Theil or switch to Dunlavys only you can answer.

Pbb, I have always set up my Thiels along the long wall. To my ears the Thiels like the Dunlavys sound best this way. Of course everyones room and circumstances differ. The key issues are space from side and rear walls and distance between speakers and between listener and speakers. The requirements between Dunlavys and Thiels are not that much different. IMHO the Thiels like more distance from side walls and less space from each other with much less toe in. As far as Dunlavy cabinets go, please bear in mind that the outer cabinets are just frames for individual enclosed driver cabinets. The finish on the Thiels as to furniture quality is much better than the Dunlavys. Your Thiel 3.5's are IMHO one of the all time great legends in audio, but as you say time marches on and the SCIVA's are a more ambitious product marketed to a higher price point. I don't think either of these products are bright unto themselves, but neither are they forgiving of preceding components sonic aberations.

Justin,
Having heard both extensively and owning one(Thiel), I can say that they are different flavors from the same pot. Each has different strengths, both are excellent speakers. The Thiels excell in detail and transparency. They are a little less dynamic and a touch bright. The Dunlavys excell in coherence and soundstaging. They are a little grainy compared to the Thiels and get congested sounding at loud volumes. I think that the Dunlavys are a lateral move(which may be more to your liking,I don't know) than an upgrade. You need to go listen to them along with your amp and cables. Hope this helps. Enjoy listening.