First order cross-overs, stepped drivers, time and phase waveform coherent, similar impedance load, similar seating distance for driver integration, etc., etc.. Sure there are differences, but how many other speakers share all those attributes? |
Much of what the Dunlavy's do so well depends on listening from the correct location. |
If I might add a little more regarding comparisons between the Vandy 2's and the Dunlavy IV's bass. The Vandy's bass might be a little looser, the Dunlvay's bass a little tighter. Both are about the same in bass depth.
Based upon your last post, it appears as though you'll like the Dunlay's a bit more. |
Sorry, I haven't heard the Telydynes. FWIW, I don't think you'll get much more bass from the SC IV's than your Vandy 2's. With that said, I'd rather the Dunlavys, especially at that price. |
Perhaps it's just me, but I wouldn't describe the Vandy 2's as having "...just no bottom end.". |
I've long held that the Vandy 2's just might be the best value in all of audio. While not the last word in low end depth, they're much better in that regard compared to most anything near their price and size. Despite their size, I don't think you will hear much deeper bass from the SCIV's. You have to move up the Dunlavy line for that. |
By comparing the Dunlavy's to the Vandersteens your comparing two speakers that are more similar to each other than most others are. IMHO, the Dunlavy's just further the the Vandy qualities; less laid back, more neutral, bigger soundstage, more dynamic. The Dunlavy line really starts to shine with the SCIVA's on up, and with corresponding prices that go on up too. |
Dunlavy used off the shelf drivers, so they should be fairly easy to replace, ...but each set of speakers was hand tweaked via cross-overs to a model template. |
Honestly, I really just don't know. The asking price should make them easy to resell if your not completely satisfied, but these are rather cumbersome items to flip. For someone else, I might suggest giving them a go, but for your rather casual listening style, I'm not so sure it will be worth it. |
That depends on you and your room. |
Please forgive me for offering this very obvious friendly advice; proper setup is needed to really let the Dunlavy's demonstrate all that they're capable of. |
Don't forget some thick absorptive material behind the listening position when setting up along the the long wall. |
4-6' forget it, you need at least 8' and preferably more for proper driver integration. |
The measurement is from ear to speaker, not from ear to center of the triangle baseline. You can have the listening position directly in front of the opposing wall, if, and only if you have an appropriate amount of absorptive material directly behind the listening position. I suggest you do some measurements before moving everything around. |
If you could set them up about 12' apart from center of tweeter to center of tweeter, about 2' from the long wall behind them, that would be even better. Do remember to toe them in. It appears you might be in the ball park after all. To avoid comb filtering effects, be sure to use absorptive material behind the listening position. Such a setup should even out bass response (typically the biggest challenge) and help imaging. |
Pryso, is of course correct, up to a point. There are minimum requirements that need to be met to allow the design goals to work. |
How far are you seated from the loudspeakers? Did you put some absorptive sound treatment behind you? |
Excellent! Are you seated close to that rear wall? |
If you move back to about 1' from the wall behind the listening position/or until your about 12' from the speakers (trial & error), and have the speakers backs about 2-3' from the wall behind them, you should have better driver integration and smoother bass response. |
^If you have toe in dialed right, you might want to have the base of the triangle a bit larger than the legs. |
FWIW, the absorptive room treatment I was suggesting was not intended for bass frequencies, and the recommendations and reasons for those recommendations were given to me personally by John Dunlavy. |
Proceed with caution, the parts can be improved upon, but they are customized for the particular drivers used in each speaker. Each set of speakers were tested to a standard model and tweaked until a rather tight match was met, not something that all manufacturers go to the trouble of doing. If they were mine, unless they were broken, I'd leave well enough alone.YMMV. |
This is all off the top of my head and time may have compromised my memory on all these particulars, but I seem to remember Dunlavy changing drivers (woofers?) and tweaking the cross-overs accordingly, on the SCIVs at one point. The SCIVAs are a different and better speaker altogether, and no the SCIVs can't be upgraded to SCIVAs. I'm not sure, but I don't think the "Signature" nomenclature really means anything. |
