Brauser: I agree completely. Accuracy isn't subjective. Some audiophiles might prefer various colorations, but the notion that accuracy is open to personal interpretation and can't be measured in speakers is sheer foolishness.
So while there are numerous more "exciting" speakers -- visually and sonically -- speakers that are phase coherent , capable of reproducing a square wave and close to ruler flat in their frequency response are few and far between. Dunlavys are obviously in that class.
Dunlavy failed because of poor marketing and dozens of reasons already mentioned. I think a lot of people who spend thousands on speakers just want something that looks a lot more exotic. For sonics and good engineering, I'll put Dunlavy up against anything.
Tireguy: The car speaker comparison is pretty silly, don't you think? I doubt you really put those speakers in the class of Dunlavy. I mean, what exactly do those spec sheets show, and how were the measurements performed?
So while there are numerous more "exciting" speakers -- visually and sonically -- speakers that are phase coherent , capable of reproducing a square wave and close to ruler flat in their frequency response are few and far between. Dunlavys are obviously in that class.
Dunlavy failed because of poor marketing and dozens of reasons already mentioned. I think a lot of people who spend thousands on speakers just want something that looks a lot more exotic. For sonics and good engineering, I'll put Dunlavy up against anything.
Tireguy: The car speaker comparison is pretty silly, don't you think? I doubt you really put those speakers in the class of Dunlavy. I mean, what exactly do those spec sheets show, and how were the measurements performed?